Sounds like a Tempest in a Teapot to me. There were three voice teachers
in a graduate jury in a premier conservatory judging a particular older
Mezzo-soprano. She was 28. The first teacher commented on what a
beautiful voice the student had. (probably her student). The second
teacher said that it was the ugliest voice she had heard all day. The
third teacher merely mused and said that it might be a beautiful voice if
she had good instruction.
You have similar discussions over here about vitamins. For years the
scientists tried to do a double blind test on the use and efficacy of
vitamins and came up with zip. They said the same thing about trace
minerals in aquariums and dance therapy for injuries. What changed the
world was that salt water aquariums became very popular and with $500 fish
dying because of a lack of trace minerals. The industry ignored the
science and went with what worked. As for vitamins and dance therapy, it
was million dollar athletes. When you invest 28 million dollars in an iron
clad contract for an athlete and he gets injured then medical theory goes
out the window. You must be practical. The same is true for singers who
were told by Otto-Laryngologists not to worry about a cold. There
developed a whole new specialty in OL that concerned singers. They now use
vitamins and most of the other remedies that science still can't prove.
Of course the regualr OL world calls them quacks and envies there high fees
and lack of dependance on HMOs and Insurance. If a cold means that you
will lose $50,000 for a concert at Carnegie Hall then you will be willing
to spend the $250 to $500 necessary to get you functioning. Myth, Smyth,
if it works then that is what matters. Let the scientists grow up and
figure out why. They can start with Ronald Reagan's schedule and why IT
worked.
The interesting thing about Astrology is that no one points out it being
culture bound. Or that popular Astrology switched several years ago from
moon signs to sun signs because it fitted daily columns in the media.
Everyone assumes that underneath we are all the same even if we have
different stories and different views of the stars. But that would get us
back to an Indigenous discussion and away from "objectivity" so I won't go
there except to agree with Clifford Geertz that even alleged "common sense"
is really "local knowledge" and to point out that at the Princeton Institute
where Geertz now and Einstein formerly worked it was the scientists who
refused to allow Geertz to study the culture of science. They called such
a study "unscientific." Maybe we should just say that everything is
political and let it go at that.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ed Weick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 9:31 AM
Subject: More details: Re: The Rotting Universities
> Hi Ed,
>
> At 08:31 13/08/01 -0400, you wrote:
> >As for the woman at the Sorbonne who wrote the thesis on astrology, I
would
> >be curious about what she wrote on. For example, perhaps she is a social
> >historian interested in the role astrology played in peoples lives or in
the
> >decisions made by the ruling classes. I doubt very much that she was
> >granted a degree in astrology, but then I suppose anything is possible
these
> >days.
>
> More details (according to The Times):
> <<<<
> A number of French scientists have joined a call for Mme Teisser's
> doctorate to be revoked. They have poured scorn on her 900-page thesis,
> entitled "The epistemological situation of astrology through ambivalence
> fascination/rejection in post-modern societies."
> >>>>
>
> . . . and here's a bit more:
> <<<<
> Bernard Lahire, Professor of Sociology at the elite �cole Normale
> Sup�rieure, said in his report of the affair: "It is not that this is a
bad
> sociological thesis. It is one that has a total absence of sociology in
it.
> It only defends the point of view of the astrologer and lacks anything
that
> can be called scientific. . . . [The Sorbonne has become] a refuge for
> lecturers without rigour and who are sometimes explicitly anti-rational."
> >>>>
>
> Oh, and there was something else about Mme Teissier -- she once advised
> President Mitterand on the conduct of the Gulf War.
>
> So help us!
>
> Keith Hudson
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________________
>
> Keith Hudson, General Editor, Calus <http://www.calus.org>
> 6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
> Tel: +44 1225 312622; Fax: +44 1225 447727;
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ________________________________________________________________________
