At 06:01 PM 10/09/2002 +0000, you wrote: >>From: joanna bujes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>At 02:41 PM 10/09/2002 +0000, you wrote: >>>That's the horror of it all. As Huxley suggested in Brave New World, >>>there doesn't seem to be any choice between the dehumanization of >>>science and reversion to simple savagery. As I said, I don't have any >>>answer to this. >> >>Oh, that's just silly. We have a historically constructed "scientific >>model" -- which is deformed by the bureaucratization of science and by >>its largely unconscious and unreflective formation -- all of which is to >>say that our choice encompasses far more than this "dehumanized science" >>and savagery. >> >>Joanna > >I'm all ears. The dilemma Huxley poses has always struck me as the most >nightmarish, and compelling, depiction of the human prospect. I'd welcome >details on how you see we can get out of this fix. > >Carl
Well, for one thing, I don't accept Huxley's binary. After all, the concentration camps were run very scientifically, but the savagery quotient was high. The same may be said of any sweatshop. It is also the case that the quality of life in many a "savage" nation is better than ours today. A critique of the development of science under capitalism would take much more than an email. Suffice it to say that what we refer to as SCIENCE today is a specific historical form suffering from specific historical deformations. I leave it to your imagination to envision how intelligent, conscious beings might be able to develop alternative forms. Joanna
