Planck, Schrodinger, and what to do during political catastr

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter tzimie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Planck Schrödinger
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

This discussion revolves around the personal and political dilemmas faced by individuals in Russia amidst a challenging political climate. Participants reflect on historical perspectives, particularly referencing conversations between Schrödinger and Planck, and relate them to contemporary issues of immigration, moral responsibility, and the stability of the Russian regime.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express a personal struggle with the decision to stay in Russia or emigrate, drawing parallels to historical figures like Schrödinger.
  • There is a discussion about the perceived stability of the Russian regime, with some suggesting that predicting Putin's longevity is complex and uncertain.
  • One participant notes that the political situation in Russia may not be as predictable as in other authoritarian regimes, suggesting that Putin could theoretically face challenges but expressing skepticism about his imminent departure from power.
  • Another participant raises concerns about the economic factors affecting Russia, particularly the impact of oil prices on the regime's stability and longevity.
  • Some participants highlight the moral implications of hoping for a catastrophic event as a means to achieve political change, framing it as a painful but potentially necessary choice for long-term improvement.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the stability of the Russian regime and the potential for change, with no clear consensus on the likelihood of Putin's departure or the implications of economic factors. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best course of action for individuals facing these dilemmas.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of personal decisions in the context of political instability and the difficulty of making predictions about the future of the regime. There are references to differing biases and perspectives among observers, which may influence interpretations of the situation.

tzimie
Messages
256
Reaction score
27
When I was young I read Schrödinger's memoirs. I can't find a book, but I remember he described an interesting conversation with Max Planck about what to do during the political catastrophe. The conversation was in 1940, and Schrödinger was asking Planck's opinion on what to do - to immigrate, or to stay in nazi Germany tring to help talented students and to protect scientific school.

I live in Russia, and I start asking similar questions to myself. Immigration is not a problem, I lived and worked for 3 years in US and France. They question is, "should" I do it, and as there are less and less "mentally uncontaminated" people around me, is it my responsibility (please forgive me for being pathetic) to keep light in the deeper and deeper darkness.

I understand that such decisions are personal and of course I am not asking what to do. But I am not sure for how long I could bear it. So my question is, for the people who are outside, how stable the regime in Russia is? Some things are better visible from the outside by neutral observers. Of course, sooner or later all will end, there some natural limits, and for now brain stroke appears to be the only hope fro Russia, but it would be difficult to wait another 15-20 years, so I am asking about short term (2-4 years).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: S.G. Janssens
Physics news on Phys.org
tzimie said:
neutral observers
Its really naive to think anyone who is going to reply here is a "neutral observer"!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
Shyan said:
Its really naive to think anyone who is going to reply here is a "neutral observer"!

Well, not neutral, but at least non-local observer )
 
tzimie said:
Well, not neutral, but at least non-local observer )
What's the advantage of such observers?
 
Shyan said:
What's the advantage of such observers?
3rd party observers are always a useful thing, regardless of (and sometimes because of) their differing biases. This is true of basically any context in which you seek a second opinion.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mheslep
tzimie said:
So my question is, for the people who are outside, how stable the regime in Russia is? ... Of course, sooner or later all will end, there some natural limits, and for now brain stroke appears to be the only hope fro Russia, but it would be difficult to wait another 15-20 years, so I am asking about short term (2-4 years).
Your struggle says positive things about your moral compass. Here in the US, people often say "if xxx gets elected President, I'm moving to Canada", but few people ever do (and the stakes are much lower). You sound more serious.

Regarding the specific question, though; a dictator's stranglehold on the political process of what is supposed to be a democracy is difficult to predict. It's not like Cuba where it was an easy bet that Castro would stay in power as long as he wanted...and then be replaced by Castro. But Putin MAY or could theoretically run into issues. Do I think he will? No, my bet is that he'll still be in power in 30 years.

Putin isn't Hitler, but he might be Stalin Lite, and he'll probably live longer.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mheslep
russ_watters said:
3rd party observers are always a useful thing, regardless of (and sometimes because of) their differing biases. This is true of basically any context in which you seek a second opinion.
My point was that such choices are what make up who people are. Others can't tell someone who to be!
 
Shyan said:
My point was that such choices are what make up who people are. Others can't tell someone who to be!
The OP isn't asking who to be, s/he is simply asking for a prediction of Putin's longevity.
 
tzimie said:
I understand that such decisions are personal and of course I am not asking what to do. But I am not sure for how long I could bear it. So my question is, for the people who are outside, how stable the regime in Russia is? Some things are better visible from the outside by neutral observers. Of course, sooner or later all will end, there some natural limits, and for now brain stroke appears to be the only hope fro Russia, but it would be difficult to wait another 15-20 years, so I am asking about short term (2-4 years).
I, too, am afraid that Putin and his clique are not leaving in the short term. Certainly he is not leaving soon enough.
russ_watters said:
Your struggle says positive things about your moral compass.
I second that, both your reasons for staying as well as for leaving are admirable.

One of my advisors spent the beginning of his scientific career in Russia, then left with his family. He lived in different places in Western Europe from the 1990s onward, but has now settled down. I'm not sure to what extent his decision to leave was morally or politically motivated.
 
  • #10
russ_waters said:
But Putin MAY or could theoretically run into issues. Do I think he will? No, my bet is that he'll still be in power in 30 years.

Well, my biggest hope are oil prices. Prices are too low to support russian oil-oriented economy. There are some financial resources accumulated during the period when prices were high, however, with the current burn rate they will be exhausted in approx 1 year. After that... imagine the small cage with rats without food. What they would do? of course, eat each other. I hope it will be the same in Putin's environment. So yes, he can live much longer... But it does not guarantee him from "sudden health problems", "heart attack", "helicopter crash" etc. After that I expect a period of chaos. But I see at as positive event, like "hard reset" of a computer.

So in some sense I am more optimistic than you, I don't expect him to last very long. However, if nothing bad happens, or if oil returns back to 120$ per barrel, then yes, he will last for decades.

The moral dilemma here, however, is that my only hope is to expect something "bad" short term (as catastrophic even will "unlock" country from the state where it's stuck). "Bad" short term is the only hope for "good" long term. Now imagine what other people think about me - they think about me as "traitor" while for me it is like a painful surgery. Short term pain, long term - salvation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 143 ·
5
Replies
143
Views
12K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K