Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

To demonstrate how progressive a scientific mind can be... "The real purpose of Socialism is to get past the predatory phase of human development." --Albert Einstein So, what does socialist science look like? In response to Michael: It is good to meet you. Perhaps you are one

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

On 2017-04-25 13:49, Florian Cramer wrote: > In other words, if anti-scientific populism is one (right-wing) hell, > evidence-based policies and regulations is the other > (neoliberal-technocratic) hell. This a more double-edged sword. I remember lots of policy discussions and proposals in the

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

I took part on Saturday in the March for Science in SF. It wast a bit of d�ja vu for me, since, about 47 years ago, I helped organize and participated in the March 4, scientists' movement that became "Science for the People" (SftP), and then the first Earth Day the next year.

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

I'll try a deconstruction from the perspective of having "designed" a leaderless political organization... On 04/23/2017 06:54 PM, Florian Cramer wrote: > 1) The central demand of the 'March for Science', "evidence-based > policies and regulations", is toxic and dangerous. This approach has

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

On 04/25/2017 04:34 AM, Eric Kluitenberg wrote: ... the proliferation of automated citation indexes, research and performance metrics, persisting science publishing oligopolies, a general war on non-quantiative approaches, a general distrust towards the Humanities and even the social sciences

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:18 PM, Lunenfeld, Peter B. wrote: > or as little sense as anything else. If you feel there remains a > difference, then writing off the M4S comes off as pointlessly fractious > at best, and ally-denigrating, wheel-churning self-destruction at

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

Fascinating discussion - this point of Bian seems crucial: > On 25 Apr 2017, at 05:38, Brian Holmes wrote: > > Times change and those who cling to outdated critiques become irrelevant > if not reactionary. One of the most urgent agendas of the present is the >

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

Like any of the disciplines, professions or institutions whereby society shapes itself, that thing called science is worth struggling over. And never was there a better chance to do it than now! I agreee with Peter Lunenfeld, and with David Garcia's remarks on Karl Popper. Those who support a

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

Exactly what I was thinking, Peter. I marched on Saturday as well because I'd prefer that not only my kids have a planet to live on, but one that has not seen even worse crises of displacement thanks to drought and famine. I'd like to not see more and more immigrants rounded up an put into

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

On 24 April 2017 at 06:25, Prem Chandavarkar wrote: Having said that, Nagel refuses to allow the pendulum to swing to the other extreme of total relativism, one has to build on the utility of the objective viewpoint in order to make a complete

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

> What it really needed for me to believe in the efficacy of science as a > political force ... When this event was advertised on a departmental mailing list here in Edinburgh, it was specifically described to be "non-political". That struck me as at best nonsensical but at the same time oddly

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

Salaried scientists, as any other salaried group, are mostly functional cowards. As it was mentioned in a recent thread, there is a substantial difference between "networks of practice" and "communities of practice". It sounds silly, but the time has come when we need Kickstarter-based

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

This is nicely put. And your point about context is especially apt. It's comparable—though not identical—to the liberal misunderstanding which attempts to substitute "All lives matter" for "Black lives matter." The matter is context: Science is systematically under attack as Black people are

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

yours -- Peter Lunenfeld From: nettime-l-boun...@mail.kein.org [nettime-l-boun...@mail.kein.org] on behalf of Eric Kluitenberg [e...@xs4all.nl] Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 12:33 AM To: Nettime Subject: Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 4:37 AM David Garcia wrote: 3) Just as opposition against Trump creates false solidarity with neoliberals, opposition against climate change-denying, creationist etc. politics can create false solidarity with a Popperian

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

It is a problem when an issue is polarised across two extremes without exploring some substantive middle ground. Am reading Thomas Nagel, whose views are quite useful on this subject. He argues that the objective viewpoint that science prescribes is extremely useful, but if you extend this

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

Similar sentiment - in fact I am all for ‘alternative facts’, just different alternatives than the ones the Trump posse is proposing… -e. > On 23 Apr 2017, at 18:54, Florian Cramer <flrnc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Why I won't support the 'March for Science':* > > &g

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

Nagel says in The View from Nowhere, “What really happens in the pursuit of objectivity is that a certain element of oneself, the impersonal or objective self, which can escape from the specific contingencies of one’s creaturely point of view, is allowed to predominate. Withdrawing into

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

I agree here with , Morlock. The March for Science is not the problem. Science is knowledge, learning, knowing. The problem is corporate and privatized research agenda governing the direction of flows; the problem is science being made real if that's what serves capitalism. It's gone on forever

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

(0) 17643631777 Leinestrasse 50, Neukolln, BERLIN www.racheloreilly.net On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Florian Cramer <flrnc...@gmail.com> wrote: (This was a social media posting, but I thought that I should share it with the larger Nettime community. -F) Why I won'

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

It's more complicated: This would not only create an oligarchy of those of who have the means to fund scientific research for backing up a political demand. Even worse, it's not about funding scientific research, it's about buying 'results' and 'scientists'. 3) Just as opposition against

Re: Why I won't support the March for Science

3) Just as opposition against Trump creates false solidarity with neoliberals, opposition against climate change-denying, creationist etc. politics can create false solidarity with a Popperian understanding of research and knowledge. (Coincidentally, Popper's philosophy

Why I won't support the March for Science

(This was a social media posting, but I thought that I should share it with the larger Nettime community. -F) Why I won't support the 'March for Science':* 1) The central demand of the 'March for Science', "evidence-based policies and regulations", is toxic and dangerous