The Witness: Yesterday, Tomorrow and You 

The fact that we are watching this 50 years later on technology not even invented at the time does add substantial weight to his argument. Without the technologists, this recording would have been lost but now we can watch it over and over again and import it into other forms of art like video games. We can even discus the merits instantly with anyone in the world using the very technology he is predicting in the video.

The irony of having this video in a video game, which I would say is a piece of art

Your mind, no your entire body will explode when you realise, that the "Round" picture of the Amino acid is part of a puzzle combined with the green door frame.

People regard arts as something magical and put so much weight into it that they regard scientific discovery an art as well even though its just information waiting to be found. I once made the mistake of commenting someone saying something like "Without inventor X we wouldn't have Y" with a response like: "No, likely someone else would have invented it instead." - The rage posts I got sort of confirmed that to them, the person who did the discovery was more important than the thing being discovered. To me this is turning everything upside down, as its seems its the legends and myths surrounding a particular person that made them feel something - much like art and music. While I personally believe its what was discovered was the true information here. I can understand why many feel this way though as we are social beings so its important for us to relate to each other as human beings of value, hence we mirror that feeling onto others, seeking comfort with others having the same subjective opinions. On a sad side I'd say that the information-technology revolution that Burke talks about here in this video clip has not been fully grasped as its getting harder and harder to find actual information as a user browsing the web have to wade through endless blogs and videos spewing nonsense, lies and conspiracies. If anything the first thing one should learn is critical thinking so you dont waste half your life trying to find truths and actual information. The arts can be used to spread knowledge too, but its more about evoking emotions as that is generally whats more commercial, and is often superficial or too abstract (where the observer can put whatever meaning he wants into it) to actually rely actual information.

People focus too much in what they disagree violently with, and too little with the actual message. True objectivity is impossible, but we must strive to achieve it either way, in order to see things from a more absolute perspective. That's what being a true searcher, as Einstein once said, is about :p

I'm impressed at how deep, varied and respectful people's takes on this are in the comments section. Personally, I don't think Burke was trying to downplay the value of art in general, but he could have done a better job getting that across. As it is, it sounds like he's implying that art is simply a weak attempt to convey objective knowledge. Art isn't science, and they should be considered as separate. To judge art by its ability to deliver cold, hard facts to its audience is like judging a fork for its ability to hold soup. Although I don't know much about James Burke, he strikes he as being a smart guy who's above thinking that way. Art is a human interaction, like a conversation. Maybe it only shows you an interpretation of the world, and maybe it does say more about the artist than about reality, but that has its own value, and as long as the audience understands that what they're looking at isn't objective, and that interpretations are a flexible tool, that value is massive. Science is an amazing thing. We're basically cheating evolution - in only a few centuries, we've doubled our own life expectancy. We can move mountains, even go to space, all thanks to the knowledge that geniuses over the ages have worked so hard to build up. But I think that we should never forget the importance of art, either. It's the means by which we communicate with each other on a large scale. It helps us understand each other, and it helps remind us that each human is a complex being that thinks thousands of thoughts each day. We all feel emotion, there's no way around it. Art encourages us to understand those emotions better, keep a sharp mind, and seek to see eye to eye with each other.

James Burke said this in 1978. He is my Sensei, who opened my mind up to the world and the universe. *BOWS*

As a music producer I've often struggled with what the "utility" is behind art - especially in the face of convincing arguments like this. But at the end of the day, why I am driven to create? Because I realize the most meaningful experiences in my life have been works of art and human relationships.

So here's the thing about the clip that most people my age and younger don't have the context for is the explosion at the beginning is due do a montage of full Luddite nature on full display because tech, and specifically the info collected by tech, specified something that people didn't agree with as an outcome. The fact that the clip itself is about how we view the world due to the tech we have at hand eludes because context is usually forgotten.

People on here thinking James Burke is disaparaging art. Um, he definitely liked Art, Music, History etc etc. He did many programs on those topics. He's discussing change and it being driven by "Hard" knowledge IE Science. Not saying I entirely agree, but if you're thinking he's having a go at art as being useless, you're seeing something that isn't there.

Sooo many people are misrepresenting what is being said so they can be upset lol

James Burke spittin' fire right there

I CAME HERE FOR ANSWERS AS I JUST STARTED THE GAME AND WAS EXTREMELY CONFUSED WHEN A GUY STARTED TALKING TO ME AFTER I SOLVED A PRETTY EASY PUZZLE, AND NOW I'M JUST EVEN MORE CONFUSED BY THESE COMMENTS??????????

This example he talks about third person interpretation is a good example between simulacra and simulation philosophy.

my hero

....and so, give everyone a computer and have at it? Wow --- Burke understood the consequenced of information and give the recent 60 minutes interview ----

Philosophy, especially analytic philosophy, is massively misunderstood and misrepresented in our culture. Its focus is on the application of formal logic and critical thinking. Philosophical/formal logic also has cross over with higher math and theoretical physics. Also, this entire monologue is James Burke doing philosophy! (of a different branch).

People who are separating this from the context of the witness and taking it at face value are off as well

I go around and see Burke, Dawkins, Tyson or any number of the others and I only wish I could be like one of them.

If not for people with certain political views, it would be impossible to spread the knowledge and the world would be "powerless" as he says. So nah, its shitty

Yes! We should all live in empty rooms with no books, no music, no entertainment and just study, study, study! Why enjoy life or have a personality at all? Let's all be automatons of knowledge.

I came here cause of 4chan

I don't like how he puts art and science against each other. Art and science are part of each other. They're walking hand in hand together. One helps to relax and enjoy the world the other helps to understand and interfere with it! Fortunately in another perspective, art also defines the interference with the world. Haptic defines how we interact with the scientifically world in a artistically manner.

No context, so just addressing things as I watch: • "How easy is it for knowledge to spread?" With the near ubiquity of the Internet and access to it, rather more quickly tthan ever before. But any increase in the ease with which "knowledge" spreads is also an increase with which "unknowledge" spreads. Even then, not all "knowledge" is inherently "good" or "useful". Furthermore, it's aarguable that the more widespread knowledge is, the less you see specialised knowledge. Where schools may once have had higher standards to mould "the gifted" into being even better at using their gifts, the spread of public education has raised general knowledge and ability ffor everyone marginally while bringing "the gifted" down by lack of opportunity, forcing tthem into lower standards, etc. Even then, just because knowledge spreads more easily, doesn't mean that it is spreading at all. • Science VS Humanities. His claim is that humanities like philosophy aand art are merely interpretations of the world. So is science. Science does nothing but describe the world, and can offer no deeper insight as to the WHY, only the how. In that regard, it's certainly no better than the humanities. It's not to say science is not useful, but it still hasn't explained anything. It only describes the world in greater detail than say, religion has. Sure, we have more effective technologies and medicines now because of science, but all these advancements have failed to truly increase the quality of life: sscience doesn't fix existential despair, or cure nihilism, or provide meaning or purpose, which are as fundamental issues affecting quality of life as any physical disease. m • "[Science] leaves only what is demonstrably true about the world." Eh, not really. Science is still a set of beliefs. How many times has declared facts of the world, only to have them completely overturned by new scientific discoveries? Even many scientific theories fail to even be compatible with one-another. How long has the problem in physics existed where quantum mechanics and macro physics studies cannot be combined into a single encompassing theory? Hell, the vast majority of these sciences, really all scientific "knowledge", is theoretical. They observed, for example, quantum entanglement. Yet they can't even come up with theories as to how or why it occurs and operates the way that it does, let alone suggest even anything ffor which this knowledge could be used if it were discovered (not that that isn't a reason to pursue it). Again, not bashing science, but it's certainly not a God compared to the humanities. Even then, science is still dogmatically ideological and opinion laden, with it's oown crutches and being used as a crutch. • "Because of science, people realise they don't know as much as they think they do." Yeah, which the humanities have been successfully doing for ages. Even one of the best known quotes of the "founder" of Western philosophy, Socrates, over 2.5 thousand years ago: "all that I know, is that I know nothing" (paraphrased of course). Even modern religions still do the exact same thing. And you can argue as much that because of science, and broader access to "knowledge", people believe they know MORE than they actually do. People today constantly talk about scientific facts that they don't even understand. So many believe these "facts" inherently, and anyone that questions them is a scientific heretic. • "Science shows our freedom, blah blah blah." Yeah, Sartre (a philosopher) beat science to that point. Science doesn't teach "asking the right questions" anymore than the humanities do. In fact, philosophy is largely concerned with asking "the right questions" and actually, in my opinion, better at teaching how to think and reason than is science. However, philosophy and the humanities aare treated the same way: people don't generally think and question more and spew philosophical "truths" and "facts" dogmatically the way they do with scientific "truths" and "facts". Science, in reality, is just another investigative tool, and no better than the humanities in that regard of investigating the world. • "Communications revolution & lack of access makes us deaf, dumb and blind." Well, we have access and are still just as "deaf, dumb and blind". See the points about dogmatism above. The old cliché still rings true: "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." • "What do we do about [that]? I don't know..." Good job using science to figure that shit out. Tell me again about how all this increase in scientific knowledge as changed basic human nature. Tell me again how it solves these basic ills... tell me how science and the communications revolution has fixed more problems than it has created.

weird how he complains about how "art tells us more about who made it than about the thing they're describing and it's made third-hand by you interpreting it" like that's not the entire point lol (i know this bit isn't even the point of what he's saying but, yknow, i don't think one can be expected to just not talk about it lol)

I too have found through my whole life thinking that the only things that drives humanity is Science and Technology, and i finally found this guy. Wow, my mind was blown when finding this in the game :D, and i 100% agree with James Burke. I hated literature in school so much, and now it seems for a reason. As James Burke says: art, philosophy, politics, music, literature are just interpretations of the world. Furthermore, that explains why religion is absolute bullsh1t and the reason why humanity is being hold back by it.

This guy..... THIS GUY. THE COMPLETE ARROGANCE ASTOUNDS ME.My boyfriend...he shows me this. He brings it up and shows it to me and then says he agrees! Take an art history class. Take an art class in general. If you think looking at a picture of iconoclastic art is somehow easier than looking at a pretty picture of science you are gravely mistaken. Iconoclasm says something about what was going on in the world at that time.