
Ask HN: Which modern-day truths do you think may be refuted in the future? - FarhadG
I&#x27;m always fasciated by what sort of truths we hold to be true that—we expect or better yet don&#x27;t expect—to be refuted in the future.<p>For example, the classical cases in history around classical mechanics, geocentric cosmology, deterministic and predictability relationships, etc.
======
praveen9920
Countries. The imaginary borders that separates humans from rest of the world.

History teaches us that any borders can be redrawn or eliminated completely.

I wanted to say "religion" but it is proven to be the sticky one.

~~~
throw51319
Culture and community can bring out the best and worst in people. I would
argue that it is better than none at all though.

Otherwise we will become one giant blob of humans for multinational corps to
market to and control. Generations of culture are replaced by one mono-pop
culture. The strings can be easily pulls.

------
CM30
Well, I think many ideas we hold about education and how that should work are
probably going to be refuted in future. The idea that a physical school or
college with lecture halls and classrooms is the 'best' way to learn likely
isn't going to hold true much longer, nor are we always going to have
teachers/professors standing in front of a class reading from a
book/paper/whiteboard/PowerPoint presentation.

I think in future, we're going to figure out much better, more scientifically
grounded ways of teaching people, and we'll look back at the current methods
of teaching in the same way we do old school medicine with leeches, humors and
elements.

Not sure which scientific truths/theories we'll see refuted and replaced
though.

~~~
LocalMan
Attachment to a leader and/or parent seems to be a deep part of human
personality. Especially in the first decade or two of life. I suppose a
teacher-at-the-front could be replaced by a soft robot. But that's not a
really large change in the method of education.

I do remember when learning calculus that I didn't really know integration and
differentiation until I'd worked through a dozen or two of the homework
problems. I could understand in class and nod my head, but would not be able
to use that knowledge until I'd ground through enough example problems. That
paradigm seems to be true for a lot of technical subjects and must be a result
of the nature of human cognition.

And the world is getting even more scientific, more technological and more
mathematical.

And those who teach writing emphasize that it is necessary to write a lot. A
whole lot.

Recently popular has been the idea that to master any subject whatever
requires 10,000 hours of practice. That idea has been attacked and taken down
a peg, but not defeated; practice <i>alone</i> is never enough.

