"Since many English professors hold little respect for numbers, reason, or objectivity, a Moretti always loses to the credentials of either a Feyerabend or a Bloom."
Ugh. WTF is that? I was tracking fairly well up until slide 17. I see no reason to include "reason" in that assertion. That seems like a "tell" ... telling me that the person who wrote this presentation has a debilitated understanding of English professorship (whatever that may be). But _perhaps_ also telling me that this presentation is simply a sales pitch ... perhaps even selling a dangerous product. Other than that, I think my reaction to all the other content is positive. But because I'm opinionated, I'll go further and raise the question of whether McMillan really understands what it means to be a linear thinker. Linear thinking (or more robustly "metaphysical reductionism") is one of the most salient threats to understanding science, particularly the trajectory followed by scientific breakthrough. It's the larger program surrounding pure methodology and pure automation. It is fideistic (faith-based): Trust in the Method. But what we see throughout the history of science is that although innovation may be 90% sweat, 9% luck and 1% inspiration, the salience of that 1% swamps the rest. The work of the methods must be done, but not at the sacrifice of the inspiration. That "unreason" appreciated by those English professors (who, just like anyone else, may not be able to express what it is they appreciate) should not be doffed. Though, I admit, there are hobgoblins everywhere, including those who would make "unreason" methodic. And I also admit, good examples of "unreason" are plentiful in the more science-friendly literary efforts pointed to in the presentation. Had she not made that tiny-in-text, huge-in-meaning, false accusation on slide 17, I probably would have nothing to say about it. 8^) On 01/08/2017 10:59 AM, Nick Thompson wrote: > In our discussions, we have often approached, and shrunk from, PostModernism, > etc. The Attachment is an outline for an introductory lecture and course on > the relation between literary critique and scientific investigation. If you > look at it, be sure to flip through to the end where science fiction is > mentioned. -- ☣ glen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
