Hi James M. Clark Professor of Psychology 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax [email protected]
>>> Michael Palij <[email protected]> 31-Mar-12 5:54 PM >>> I actually have no idea what you mean by the statement above. Of course science can stand rational critique -- it is the IRRATIONAL critiques that are a problem, you know, beliefs like the Bible tells us all we need to know about the world (remember the Stephen Colbert question?). Given that most science deniers are from conservatives and Republicans, I think we know who has co-opted the crazy train. For additional perspective on this point, see: http://scienceblogs.com/tfk/2011/06/mooney_revisits_the_republican.php JC: The science wars were / are not with conservatives. Gross and Levitt's "Higher superstition: The academic left and its quarrels with science" clearly focuses on critiques from the left. The "left" side of science's enemies tends to focus on science as just "one way of knowing" and charge it with being racist, classist, elitist, sexist, and so on. The attacks also made use of flimsy or misinterpreted "studies" of science, one of the most abused being Thomas Kuhn who actually denied that his ideas supported relativistic views of knowledge and science. So science has been under assault from the left (largely within the academy?) and also from the right (largely outside?). I believe the so-called "liberal bias" in universities may not have served us well in defending science against the attacks from within, as who wants to be charged with racism and sexism? Nor do I think anti-science in the humanities and social sciences has necessarily disappeared just because the blatant exchanges of the 1990s have waned somewhat. Of course, the left and right assaults are not independent. Wikipedia has this interesting last paragraph in its entry on the science wars: "However, more recently some of the leading critical theorists have recognized that their critiques have at times been counter-productive, and are providing intellectual ammunition for reactionary interests. Writing about these developments in the context of global warming, Bruno Latour noted that *dangerous extremists are using the very same argument of social construction to destroy hard-won evidence that could save our lives. Was I wrong to participate in the invention of this field known as science studies? Is it enough to say that we did not really mean what we meant?*[21]" And Meera Nanda has written about how postmodern and critical theory attacks on science can undermine efforts in India and other countries to challenge conservative, reactionary elements in their societies. Take care Jim --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=17055 or send a blank email to leave-17055-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
