Hi Krim
[Krimel]
In 1981 Nature editor John Maddox said in a review that Sheldrake's first
book "...is the best candidate for burning there has been for many years."
The comment has been widely quoted and cause a big controversy.
After reflecting on his comments for more than 10 years Maddox clarified
his
thinking in a 1994 BBC documentary.
"I was so offended by it, that I said that while it's wrong that books
should be burned, in practice, if book burning were allowed, this book
would
be a candidate (...) I think it's dangerous that people should be allowed
by
our liberal societies to put that kind of nonsense into currency."
DM: Funny, Maddox's reaction seems awful to me, surely science requires
exploring new ideas and hypotheses, most of course will prove to be not
very useful. What is so threatening about unorthodox ideas to people
like Maddox? There is nothing incoherent or unreasoned about Shledrake's
proposals even if they may prove to have no future as seems to be the case.
Clearly nothing needed burning, only reading and ignoring, a more civilised
approach I'd say. Rathe dumb and hysterical rhetoric I'd suggest.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
