Hi Presumably I misread your point as broader than intended, Michael. But when someone refers to "irrational critiques" of science and "science deniers," I tend to think of more than conservative attacks on science. Indeed in a post that preceded yours, I made the point about irrational attacks in the science wars.
"Where I would diverge slightly from Rick is in his final comment about science being able to stand rational critique. The problem with the "science wars" and the then and ongoing critiques of science from postmodernists and like ilk was that only one side was being rational. It is much more difficult to defend oneself against irrational attacks from people who do not value or understand reason and science. After all, those are sexist, eurocentric, racist, elitist constructs and need not be adhered to by enlightened (in the anti-enlightenment sense of the word) people." Nor did I see anything in your post that limited your comment to organized political parties. I read it as commenting on the people (conservatives and Republicans) who are "science deniers." Consideration of the literature on the science wars would find lots of people who identify as liberal and Democrats who deny science as a special way of knowing, hence the Gross and Levitt allusion to academic left. I did not want to leave the impression, which I appear to have wrongly got from your posting, that the right is all we need to worry about when it comes to attacks on science. There's lots of negativity to go around. Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor of Psychology 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax [email protected] >>> Michael Palij <[email protected]> 01-Apr-12 9:04 AM >>> On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 06:20:11 -0700, Jim Clark wrote: >>> 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 > >The science wars were / are not with conservatives. I'm sorry but where did I refer to the "science wars" above? If we accept that the "science wars" was based on the clash of post-modernism with establishment disciplines, then we are a talking primarily about a argument that has taken place in the academy and may have been only manifested itself to the larger culture in art, entertainment, and certain activities. I am, however, unaware of any "Post-modern political party" in the U.S. I doubt that even if there was one, it would have very supporters. -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=17060 or send a blank email to leave-17060-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- 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=17063 or send a blank email to leave-17063-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
