2

Yet there is something important to be gained

about the fact that mathematical structures have a reality of their own. Our individual

minds are notoriously vague and unreliable and inconsistent in their judgments. The

precision, reliability, and consistency that our scientific theories require requires

something beyond any of our individual minds. Einstein: "We find in mathematics a

much greater robustness than can be found in any given mind. Doesn't that point to

something outside of us with a reality beyond what any individual can achieve?" said.

The gifted physicist's interest in Plato's world of ideas got E1 and N1 excited. E1, "An

alternative view can be made that the mathematical world does not have an

sight, no matter how expert others may be. their own or others' opinion." said N1. E1,

"It may be useful if we present the true existence of the Platonic world in a different

way. What I mean by this existence is actually the objectivity of mathematical reality.

Platonic existence as I see it implies the existence of an objective external standard

that does not depend on our individual views or our particular culture." said. "You are

absolutely right." said Einstein, suddenly sticking out his huge tongue. "In elementary

school, my teachers thought I was stupid, but after I studied Calculus and wrote an

article, the neutral perspective of mathematics confirmed my giftedness." "Such

existence may also refer to things other than mathematics, such as morality or

aesthetics, but I am only concerned here with mathematical objectivity, which seems

to be a much more obvious issue. Let me explain this issue by taking a famous

example of a mathematical fact and link it to the problem of objectivity." "I allow it."

said Einstein, tongue still sticking out. "Suppose the validity of Fermat's claim is

actually a subjective matter. So X did this in 1995.

It would not be absurd to find a real and specific counter-example to Fermat's claim

for another mathematician X, as long as he had done it first. In such a case, the

mathematical community would have to accept the truth of X's counterexample. From

then on, any attempt by Wiles to prove Fermat's claim would be futile as X had taken

this argument first, and as a result Fermat's claim would now be false!" "Wiles will be

very angry if he hears these words, it occurred to me is Wiles Jewish?" Finally,

Einstein pulled his tongue in. 79 KIBUTZ AND TRAUMA Nec suddenly emerged

from behind the curtain in which he was hiding his thick notebook with frayed pages.

"I have been listening to you for a long time. I also have something to say about this. I

think that almost all mathematicians, regardless of their attitude towards Platonism,

would consider such possibilities plainly absurd. Of course, it may still be the case

that Wiley's argument actually contains an error and Fermat's claim is indeed false. Or

there may be a fundamental error in Wiley's argument, but Fermat's claim is true

nonetheless. Or, Wiley's argument, while true in its foundations, may involve nonrigorous steps that will not conform to the standards of some future rule of

mathematical acceptability. However, these issues do not address the point I have

reached here. The question is not whether the neutrality of Fermat's claim itself will

be convincing for a given mathematical ensemble of any given time." E1, "What do

you mean, so Wiley doesn't deserve the award? If so; Say two integers whose cubes

add up to the cube of another integer!" said. N1, "I think of 1729, it is the sum of the

cube of 9 and the cube of 10." said. "It is also the cube of 12 and the cube of one."

Nec said, "I know the story guys, Hardy comes to visit Ramanujan who is sick,

Ramanujan asks what number of taxi he took. Hardy says 1729 is an ordinary number.

Ra manujan says that this number is not an ordinary number. It says 93 +103 =13

+123 =1729. NECIP ERDOĞAN adds that there is no smaller integer that provides

this feature. Who knows, the magic number we're looking for may be 1729. If the

cube of a single integer is 1729, Wiley has deceived the whole world." said. "I think

you are right." said Einstein. "From the point of view of mathematical logic, it should

be noted that Fermat's claim is in fact a mathematical statement of a particularly

simple kind, whose objectivity is particularly evident. Only a small minority of

mathematicians may consider the veracity of such claims to be in any way subjective,

but there may be some subjectivity about the kinds of arguments that will be

considered convincing. However, there are other types of mathematical claims whose

truth can reasonably be considered a matter of opinion. Perhaps the best known of

such claims is the axiom of choice. While most mathematicians probably accept the

axiom of choice as true, others may view it as a controversial claim that may even be

false. Still others would take it as a claim whose truth is a mere matter of opinion,

something that can be considered one way or another, depending on what system of

axioms and the rules of a procedure one chooses to adhere to. Mathematicians who

support this last point of view would be relatively weak Platonists. Those who adhere

to neutrality about the correctness of the axiom of choice will be the stronger

Platonists. Although not much touched upon in physical theory, I will return to the

axis of choice as it has some relevance to the mathematics underlying the behavior of

the physical world. 81 KIBUTZ AND TRAUMA For the moment it would be

appropriate not to worry too much about this. If the axiom of choice can somehow be

resolved by an appropriate form of indisputable mathematical reasoning, then its truth

is indeed a purely objective matter." "Shut up now!" shouted Einstein suddenly, only

E1 could see him, relaying what he was whispering to himself. "I think Mr.

Superintelligence is bored." said Nec. E1, "On the other hand, if the axiom of choice

is only a matter of opinion or arbitrary decision, then the Platonic World of absolute

mathematical forms contains neither the axiom of choice nor its negation. The

mathematical claims that might belong to Plato's world are certainly those that are

objectively true. Indeed, I take mathematical objectivity, mathematical Platonism, for

what it really is. To say that some mathematical claims have a Platonic existence is

only to say that they are objectively true." said. N1, "You did a lot of philosophy, I

feel like I'm reading Sofinin's World." said. "A similar interpretation applies to

mathematical concepts—for example, the concept of the number 7, or the

multiplication rule of integers, or the idea that some set contains an infinite number of

elements—all of which have a platonic existence because they are objective concepts.

in my opinion

According to him, Platonic existence is simply a matter of objectivity, and so it should

certainly not be seen as something mystical or unscientific, although some people may

see it that way. However, as with the 82 NECIP ERDOĞAN axiom of choice,

questions about whether a particular proposition for a mathematical entity should be

regarded as having objective existence can be delicate and sometimes technical.

However, we certainly don't need to be mathematicians to appreciate the general

soundness of many mathematical concepts. The Mandelbrot cluster is extraordinarily

detailed, but it is not just any human design." "You're right," said Einstein. "Why

didn't I think of it before I died? Pick a random complex number, square it, then add

the constant c, mark the result on the plane, then square the number you found, add

the constant c, mark it on the plane, repeat the same process forever and you'll have a

perfect shape! Ah, if I had lived a little longer, maybe I would have found a fractal

too." "Remarkably, this structure is described by a mathematical rule of a certain

simplicity. We will come to this clearly, but if I try to provide this rule in detail now,

it will distract us from our current goals." said Nec. E1, "The Mandelbrot set is

certainly not an invention of any human mind. The set has taken its place on computer

screens objectively in mathematics itself. If it makes sense to assign a real existence to

the Mandelbrot set, then the existence is not in our minds, because no one can fully

understand the infinite variety and boundless complexity of the set. said. It can exist

only in the Platonic world of mathematical forms. I am aware that there will be many

readers who will have difficulty assigning any real entity to mathematical structures.

N1, "Do you have any requests from such readers, Mr. Duplicated Einstein?" asked.

"Let me ask such readers only to broaden their notion of what the term existence

might mean to them. The mathematical forms of Plato's world do not have the same

kind of existence as ordinary physical objects such as tables and chairs. They do not

have spatial positions; they do not exist in time either." "Do you and I, as two clones,

belong to the Platonic world or the physical world? Ask the inventor of

RELATIVITY that only you saw?" E1 pretended not to hear the question and began

to write in Nec's worn notebook: "Objective mathematical concepts should be thought

of as timeless entities and not as existence the moment they were first perceived by

humans. So mathematical existence is different not only from physical existence, but

also from an existence determined by our mental perceptions. Yet existence as beings

belonging to three separate worlds has a deep and mysterious connection with each

other—physical, mental, Platonic. I write down some of my beliefs or prejudices

regarding these mysteries. Concerning the first of these mysteries, which relates the

platonic world of mathematics to the physical world, it may be noted that I allow only

a small part of the mathematical world to be concerned with the workings of the

physical world. It is a case that the enormous superiority of the activities of naive

mathematicians today has no obvious connection with either physics or any other

branch of science, although one can often be surprised by important applications,

although inexperienced. Likewise, with regard to the second mystery in which

mindset definitively arises, I am not claiming that most physical structures need to

stimulate mindset. While a cat's brain does indeed awaken mental qualities, I don't

want the same for a rock. Finally, for the third mystery, I readily admit that only a

small part of our mental activity should deal with absolute mathematical truth! These

three truths are represented in the smallness of the basis of the connection between

each world with subsequent worlds taken clockwise in the diagram. But it is the

encirclement of each world in its connection with the world before it that reveals my

prejudices. The entire physical world is portrayed as governed by mathematical laws."

Einstein suddenly picked up the pencil, his graying hair stood up, looked like he was

crazy, drew three different worlds on the big picture paper and drew secret tunnels

connecting these worlds. "Do your friends see this picture?" "Even though they can't

see you, they see what an interesting picture you've drawn." said E1. "Everything in

the physical universe is actually governed in full detail by mathematical principles,

perhaps by equations as we will learn in the chapters that follow, or perhaps by some

mathematical concepts fundamentally different from the concepts we would label

today with the term equations. If this is true, then even our own physical actions will

be fully subject to such ultimate mathematical control that control can still allow." He

had completed the picture, an unseen e The picture being drawn by l was terrible for

everyone but E1. Nec looked at the carefully drawn picture. "This drawing also allows

for the belief that there can be a mindset that is not rooted in physical structures.

Finally, it allows for the existence of genuine mathematical claims whose truth is in

principle inaccessible to reason and insight. This enlarged picture presents potential

mysteries that lie beyond even what I allow in my own preferred picture of the world.

I think the more tightly organized scientific perspective of the figure has enough

mysteries. These mysteries do not go away by switching to the more relaxed order of

the sketch drawn by a ghost. Because it remains a profound enigma why laws should

be applied to the world with such extraordinary precision. What's more, it's not just

the precision but also the subtle complexity and mathematical beauty of these

successful theories that are so mysterious. There is, of course, a deep mystery as well,

how this properly organized physical material arose—and I am specifically referring

here to the living human brain—may somehow evoke the mental quality of conscious

awareness." E1 suddenly stopped. "Friends, I said these words, but the owner of these

words is Albert Einstein. I don't know how much you believe in the concept of soul

transformation, but the spirit of a gifted man is with me." said. Nec said, "There is a

mystery about how we perceive scientific truth. It's not just that our brains are

programmed to calculate with reliable methods. For example, zero, one, two, three,

independent existence and consists only of certain ideas that have been cleared of our

various minds and are completely reliable and accepted by all." said. "The

mathematics itself actually seems to have a robustness that goes far beyond what any

mathematician can perceive. Whether they are actively researching or using results

obtained by others, those who study it often feel that they are merely explorers in a

world that lies far beyond them—a world with an objectivity that transcends mere

sight, no matter how expert others may be. their own or others' opinion." said N1. E1,

"It may be useful if we present the true existence of the Platonic world in a different

way. What I mean by this existence is actually the objectivity of mathematical reality.

Platonic existence as I see it implies the existence of an objective external standard

that does not depend on our individual views or our particular culture." said. "You are

absolutely right." said Einstein, suddenly sticking out his huge tongue. "In elementary

school, my teachers thought I was stupid, but after I studied Calculus and wrote an

article, the neutral perspective of mathematics confirmed my giftedness." "Such

existence may also refer to things other than mathematics, such as morality or

aesthetics, but I am only concerned here with mathematical objectivity, which seems

to be a much more obvious issue. Let me explain this issue by taking a famous

example of a mathematical fact and link it to the problem of objectivity." "I allow it."

said Einstein, tongue still sticking out. "Suppose the validity of Fermat's claim is

actually a subjective matter. So X did this in 1995.

It would not be absurd to find a real and specific counter-example to Fermat's claim

for another mathematician X, as long as he had done it first. In such a case, the

mathematical community would have to accept the truth of X's counterexample. From

then on, any attempt by Wiles to prove Fermat's claim would be futile as X had taken

this argument first, and as a result Fermat's claim would now be false!" "Wiles will be

very angry if he hears these words, it occurred to me is Wiles Jewish?" Finally,

Einstein pulled his tongue in. 79 KIBUTZ AND TRAUMA Nec suddenly emerged

from behind the curtain in which he was hiding his thick notebook with frayed pages.

"I have been listening to you for a long time. I also have something to say about this. I think that almost all mathematicians, regardless of their attitude towards Platonism,

would consider such possibilities plainly absurd. Of course, it may still be the case

that Wiley's argument actually contains an error and Fermat's claim is indeed false. Or

there may be a fundamental error in Wiley's argument, but Fermat's claim is true

nonetheless. Or, Wiley's argument, while true in its foundations, may involve nonrigorous steps that will not conform to the standards of some future rule of

mathematical acceptability. However, these issues do not address the point I have

reached here. The question is not whether the neutrality of Fermat's claim itself will

be convincing for a given mathematical ensemble of any given time." E1, "What do

you mean, so Wiley doesn't deserve the award? If so; Say two integers whose cubes

add up to the cube of another integer!" said. N1, "I think of 1729, it is the sum of the

cube of 9 and the cube of 10." said. "It is also the cube of 12 and the cube of one."

Nec said, "I know the story guys, Hardy comes to visit Ramanujan who is sick,

Ramanujan asks what number of taxi he took. Hardy says 1729 is an ordinary number.

Ra manujan says that this number is not an ordinary number. It says 93 +103 =13

+123 =1729. NECIP ERDOĞAN adds that there is no smaller integer that provides

this feature. Who knows, the magic number we're looking for may be 1729. If the

cube of a single integer is 1729, Wiley has deceived the whole world." said. "I think

you are right." said Einstein. "From the point of view of mathematical logic, it should

be noted that Fermat's claim is in fact a mathematical statement of a particularly

simple kind, whose objectivity is particularly evident. Only a small minority of

mathematicians may consider the veracity of such claims to be in any way subjective,

but there may be some subjectivity about the kinds of arguments that will be

considered convincing. However, there are other types of mathematical claims whose

truth can reasonably be considered a matter of opinion. Perhaps the best known of

such claims is the axiom of choice. While most mathematicians probably accept the

axiom of choice as true, others may view it as a controversial claim that may even be

false. Still others would take it as a claim whose truth is a mere matter of opinion,

something that can be considered one way or another, depending on what system of

axioms and the rules of a procedure one chooses to adhere to. Mathematicians who

support this last point of view would be relatively weak Platonists. Those who adhere

to neutrality about the correctness of the axiom of choice will be the stronger

Platonists. Although not much touched upon in physical theory, I will return to the

axis of choice as it has some relevance to the mathematics underlying the behavior of

the physical world. 81 KIBUTZ AND TRAUMA For the moment it would be

appropriate not to worry too much about this. If the axiom of choice can somehow be

resolved by an appropriate form of indisputable mathematical reasoning, then its truth

is indeed a purely objective matter." "Shut up now!" shouted Einstein suddenly, only

E1 could see him, relaying what he was whispering to himself. "I think Mr.

Superintelligence is bored." said Nec. E1, "On the other hand, if the axiom of choice

is only a matter of opinion or arbitrary decision, then the Platonic World of absolute

mathematical forms contains neither the axiom of choice nor its negation. The

mathematical claims that might belong to Plato's world are certainly those that are

objectively true. Indeed, I take mathematical objectivity, mathematical Platonism, for

what it really is. To say that some mathematical claims have a Platonic existence is

only to say that they are objectively true." said. N1, "You did a lot of philosophy, I

feel like I'm reading Sofinin's World." said. "A similar interpretation applies to

mathematical concepts—for example, the concept of the number 7, or the

multiplication rule of integers, or the idea that some set contains an infinite number of

elements—all of which have a platonic existence because they are objective concepts.

in my opinion

According to him, Platonic existence is simply a matter of objectivity, and so it should

certainly not be seen as something mystical or unscientific, although some people may

see it that way. However, as with the 82 NECIP ERDOĞAN axiom of choice,

questions about whether a particular proposition for a mathematical entity should be

regarded as having objective existence can be delicate and sometimes technical.

However, we certainly don't need to be mathematicians to appreciate the general

soundness of many mathematical concepts. The Mandelbrot cluster is extraordinarily

detailed, but it is not just any human design." "You're right," said Einstein. "Why

didn't I think of it before I died? Pick a random complex number, square it, then add

the constant c, mark the result on the plane, then square the number you found, add

the constant c, mark it on the plane, repeat the same process forever and you'll have a

perfect shape! Ah, if I had lived a little longer, maybe I would have found a fractal

too." "Remarkably, this structure is described by a mathematical rule of a certain

simplicity. We will come to this clearly, but if I try to provide this rule in detail now,

it will distract us from our current goals." said Nec. E1, "The Mandelbrot set is

certainly not an invention of any human mind. The set has taken its place on computer

screens objectively in mathematics itself. If it makes sense to assign a real existence to

the Mandelbrot set, then the existence is not in our minds, because no one can fully

understand the infinite variety and boundless complexity of the set. said. It can exist

only in the Platonic world of mathematical forms. I am aware that there will be many

readers who will have difficulty assigning any real entity to mathematical structures.

N1, "Do you have any requests from such readers, Mr. Duplicated Einstein?" asked.

"Let me ask such readers only to broaden their notion of what the term existence

might mean to them. The mathematical forms of Plato's world do not have the same

kind of existence as ordinary physical objects such as tables and chairs. They do not

have spatial positions; they do not exist in time either." "Do you and I, as two clones,

belong to the Platonic world or the physical world? Ask the inventor of

RELATIVITY that only you saw?" E1 pretended not to hear the question and began

to write in Nec's worn notebook: "Objective mathematical concepts should be thought

of as timeless entities and not as existence the moment they were first perceived by

humans. So mathematical existence is different not only from physical existence, but

also from an existence determined by our mental perceptions. Yet existence as beings

belonging to three separate worlds has a deep and mysterious connection with each

other—physical, mental, Platonic. I write down some of my beliefs or prejudices

regarding these mysteries. Concerning the first of these mysteries, which relates the

platonic world of mathematics to the physical world, it may be noted that I allow only

a small part of the mathematical world to be concerned with the workings of the

physical world. It is a case that the enormous superiority of the activities of naive

mathematicians today has no obvious connection with either physics or any other

branch of science, although one can often be surprised by important applications,

although inexperienced. Likewise, with regard to the second mystery in which

mindset definitively arises, I am not claiming that most physical structures need to

stimulate mindset. While a cat's brain does indeed awaken mental qualities, I don't

want the same for a rock. Finally, for the third mystery, I readily admit that only a

small part of our mental activity should deal with absolute mathematical truth! These

three truths are represented in the smallness of the basis of the connection between

each world with subsequent worlds taken clockwise in the diagram. But it is the

encirclement of each world in its connection with the world before it that reveals my

prejudices. The entire physical world is portrayed as governed by mathematical laws."

Einstein suddenly picked up the pencil, his graying hair stood up, looked like he was

crazy, drew three different worlds on the big picture paper and drew secret tunnels

connecting these worlds. "Do your friends see this picture?" "Even though they can't

see you, they see what an interesting picture you've drawn." said E1. "Everything in

the physical universe is actually governed in full detail by mathematical principles,

perhaps by equations as we will learn in the chapters that follow, or perhaps by some

mathematical concepts fundamentally different from the concepts we would label

today with the term equations. If this is true, then even our own physical actions will

be fully subject to such ultimate mathematical control that control can still allow." He

had completed the picture, an unseen e The picture being drawn by l was terrible for

everyone but E1. Nec looked at the carefully drawn picture. "This drawing also allows

for the belief that there can be a mindset that is not rooted in physical structures.

Finally, it allows for the existence of genuine mathematical claims whose truth is in

principle inaccessible to reason and insight. This enlarged picture presents potential

mysteries that lie beyond even what I allow in my own preferred picture of the world.

I think the more tightly organized scientific perspective of the figure has enough

mysteries. These mysteries do not go away by switching to the more relaxed order of

the sketch drawn by a ghost. Because it remains a profound enigma why laws should

be applied to the world with such extraordinary precision. What's more, it's not just

the precision but also the subtle complexity and mathematical beauty of these

successful theories that are so mysterious. There is, of course, a deep mystery as well,

how this properly organized physical material arose—and I am specifically referring

here to the living human brain—may somehow evoke the mental quality of conscious

awareness." E1 suddenly stopped. "Friends, I said these words, but the owner of these

words is Albert Einstein. I don't know how much you believe in the concept of soul

transformation, but the spirit of a gifted man is with me." said. Nec said, "There is a

mystery about how we perceive scientific truth. It's not just that our brains are

programmed to calculate with reliable methods. For example, zero, one, two, three,

four, etc. There is something much deeper than the insights even the brightest among

us have when we appreciate the true meanings of terms." said. E1, "What is that

depth?" asked. "Let this remain a secret between us." said. "19. In the 20th and 20th

centuries, the view emerged that the mathematical concept of number should be

separate from the nature of physical space. Since it has been shown that

mathematically consistent geometries other than Euclid's exist, this made it

inappropriate to insist that the mathematical concept of geometry must necessarily be

deduced from the pseudo-nature of real physical space. Moreover, it can be very

difficult, if not impossible, to detect the detailed nature of this supposedly

fundamental platonic physical geometry in terms of the behavior of imperfect physical

objects. To know the nature of numbers by what geometric distance to describe, for

example, it would be necessary to know what happens at both infinitesimal and

infinitely large distances. "Even today, these questions do not have a clear solution."

said E1. "Therefore, it was much more convenient to develop the nature of a number

in a way that did not refer directly to physical measures. Accordingly, Richard

DEDEKIND and Georg CAN TOR developed their ideas of what real numbers are,

using concepts that do not refer directly to geometry. DEDEKIND's definition of real

numbers is expressed in terms from the infinite set of rational numbers. Basically we

think that both positive and negative rational numbers will be arranged in an order of

magnitude. We can imagine this ordering to occur from left to right, where we think

negative rationals are denoted indefinitely to the left, zero in the middle, and positive

rationals go forever to the right. Dedekind imagines a cut that neatly splits this screen

in half, with those to the left of the cut smaller than those to the right. We say that the

cut defines an irrational real number when the blade does not hit a real rational

number but falls between them. More precisely, it occurs when those on the left do

not have a true largest member and those on the right do not have a true smallest

member. The complete family of real numbers is obtained when the irrational system

defined in terms of such deductions is adjacent to the rational number system we

already have. Dede kind's procedure leads directly to the laws of addition, subtraction,

multiplication and division for real numbers with simple definitions. Moreover, (1/1)-

(1/3)+( 1/5)-(1/7)+(1/9)-… allows things like the infinite continuous fraction we saw

before to go further and define boundaries. Real number meanings can be given. In

fact, this sum is equal to the irrational number π/4. Although its roots go back to

ancient times, science, which we can describe as a type of knowledge and thinking

and which is a product of civilization, is actually a new concept. Spiritual like

religion, legend, mythology, philosophy in ancient times; It is difficult to talk about an

understanding of science, which is called science today, and which is essentially based

on observation and thinking, apart from efforts to meet daily needs such as

handicrafts. However, it cannot be ignored that the knowledge, techniques and

concepts obtained as a result of these efforts are the source of scientific concepts and

processes that became evident in later ages. In fact, there are two needs at the core of

scientific thinking and invention, one being the curiosity of understanding the world,

and the other, making life comfortable and safe." Nec,"

We will make life safe only for the Jews!" said. Einstein started whispering in my ear.

"You have to stop him, E1, you are humanity's only hope. If the millennium problems

are solved, the genetic codes of many viruses that are considered harmless will be in

the hands of Nec. Block this sick man now, move with N1!" I didn't know if N1 could

help me, or rather how. I had to deliver Nec's workbook to his daughter Din and son

Avn. He believed that the virtual daughter he had created in his brain had been killed

in a terrorist attack last year. Religion had checked the names of the victims one by

one. There was no victim named Shem. N1 "It was his daughter Din, whom he bought

goat milk ice cream after school." said. E1, "Nec was on the pier, looking out over the

lake when the ferry exploded." she said. "Frightened by the explosion, he believed

that the imaginary personality had been killed." said Einstein. "I talked to Avn and

Din, he needs to be taken to the psychiatric ward urgently." said E1. 89 KIBUTZ

AND TRAUMA Nec could not hear what was being said, he was focused on one spot

on the ceiling. He suddenly started talking. "The first of these needs has created a

technical tradition that includes various forms of life and skill that has been

transferred from generation to generation in the history of humanity, and the second

has created a spiritual tradition that gathers the feelings, beliefs and thoughts of

human beings. These two traditions were separated from each other in the beginning

and in different hands for a long time, and as a result, they could not find the

opportunity to interact with each other. Even in the heyday of the ancient Greek

civilization, it is seen that there were craftsmen who used manual skills and simple

techniques, on the other hand, poets, politicians and philosophers who formed the

world of feeling, belief and thought. This separation continued throughout the Middle

Ages, but began to disappear at the beginning of the new age. After the merger and

mutual interaction of the two traditions, science in the modern sense began to emerge.

It is based on an effective fusion of the two traditions of scientific thinking and

research effort, the technical skills that enable experimentation, and the theoretical

work that leads to conceptual thinking. Man's desire to dominate nature and his effort

to understand are as old as human history. The birth of modern science awaited the

union of these two aspirations. However, even in the life of the first man it is difficult

to say that these two wishes were completely separate. Because the first people used

their simple technical skills in their relationship with nature, as well as resorted to

some irrational ways such as magic. The purpose of magic was to destroy the enemies

in the past, the purpose of science today is to defeat the enemies, throughout human

history the feeling of killing and destroying does not disappear! We humans are not

mammals but a member of the virus class 90 NECIP ERDOĞAN; We enter the

habitat, destroy the host, use all the possibilities, and after destroying the beauties of

nature, we look for a new habitat." We can find the same purpose in fairy tales or

stories about the existence and order of the world, such as myths that persist from

place to place in various cultures. The reason for the creation and existence of the

Sun, Moon and stars has been imagined as eliminating the fear of human beings in the

face of life and death, providing the confidence and comfort they seek. Even in magic,

there was always the idea that nature did not change according to its wishes and that it

had to obey some laws. Early humans knew that they could not save themselves from

the fact that fire always burns, water wets, the sun is bright, winters are cold and

summers are hot. However, magic and myth are not directly the cause of the birth of

science. The birth of science was caused by the passion for understanding and

knowing as well as the effort to control nature. Although the roots of science go back

to ancient times, science, which we can describe as a type of knowledge and thinking

and which is a product of civilization, is actually a new concept. Spiritual like

religion, myth, philosophy in ancient times; It is difficult to talk about an

understanding of science, which is called science today and is based on observation

and thinking, except for the efforts to meet daily needs such as handicrafts. However,

it cannot be ignored that the knowledge, techniques and concepts obtained as a result

of these efforts are the source of scientific concepts and processes that became evident

in later ages. In fact, at the core of scientific thinking and invention lie two needs, one

being the curiosity of understanding the world, and the other, making life comfortable

and safe. The first of these needs has created a technical tradition that includes various

forms of life and skill that have been transferred from generation to generation in the

history of humanity, and the second has created a spiritual tradition that gathers

human feelings, beliefs and thoughts. These two traditions were separated from each

other in the beginning and in different hands for a long time, and as a result, they

could not find the opportunity to interact. Even in the heyday of the ancient Greek

civilization, it is seen that there were craftsmen who used simple techniques, and

poets, politicians and philosophers who created the world of feeling, belief and

thought.

is This separation continued throughout the Middle Ages, but began to disappear at

the beginning of the new age. After the merger and mutual interaction of the two

traditions, science in the modern sense began to emerge. It is based on an effective

fusion of the two traditions of scientific thinking and research effort, the technical

skills that enable experimentation, and the theoretical work that leads to conceptual

thinking. Man's desire to dominate nature and his effort to understand are as old as

human history. The birth of modern science awaited the union of these two

aspirations. However, even in the life of the first man it is difficult to say that these

two wishes were completely separate. Because, the first people used their simple

technical skills in their relationship with human-nature, as well as resorted to some

irrational ways such as magic. In fact, the purpose of magic is to influence nature: to

heal the dying patients, to prevent expected natural disasters, to destroy the enemies,

etc. We can find the same purpose in fairy tales or stories about the existence and

order of the world that persist in various cultures from place to place. The reason for

the creation and existence of the Sun, Moon and stars is imagined as eliminating the

fear of human beings in the face of life and death, providing the security and comfort

they seek. Even in magic, there was always the idea that nature did not change at will,

that it had to obey certain laws. Early humans knew that they could not save

themselves from the fact that fire always burns, water wets, the sun is bright, winters

are cold and summers are hot. However, magic and myth are not directly the cause of

the birth of science. The birth of science was caused by the passion for understanding

and knowing, as well as the effort to control nature. "What is the history of science

and technology?" We can briefly define the answer to the question as the birth and

development story of science and technology. The purpose of the history of science

and technology; to examine the emergence, dissemination and conditions of use of

objective knowledge and technique, and to provide a certain direction, a way of

thinking, and even a broader perspective. The history of science and technology tries

to achieve its purpose not by listing the results achieved in various branches of

science, but rather by explaining these results in the context of the conditions they

depend on. Its task is not to be a catalog study of facts and inventions, but to follow

and reveal the birth and development of scientific concepts, theories, techniques and

understanding. I was snapped out of my thoughts when Din suddenly entered. "How

are you dad? I've been reading the workbook for days, why is it so important to you to

solve millennium problems?" 93 KIBUTZ AND TRAUMA Religion had reached

everything I tried to hide, the genetic codes of the biological weapon we had created

were now deciphered. "I only shared this secret with my daughter Shem, Din." "You

don't have a daughter named Shem, the memories you wrote belong to me, you need

treatment, you're sick dad!" Religion was jealous of my daughter Shem, I was going

to leave the science center to her, Shem was my only heir. My daughter would use our

weapon, the vaccine of which is only in the Israeli Government, where necessary, my

life may not be enough for this, but I trusted Şem. "Call me Shem, Din, now!" At this

time, the security guards and paramedics of the science center had entered, and Din

began to cry. "I beg you, don't hurt my father!" Avn was waiting behind the whitecoat attendants, avoiding my eyes. He took my hand as if I were a s

handed me over to the officers. END