Comments on: The Queen is my dealer

By: Neil B.

Neil B. — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 01:07:45 +0000

Scientism is indeed an overreach (it’s the neoconservatism of science….) OK, here’s one for the idea that the scientific method is best for finding out anything: Let’s say you and I had a conversation yesterday, about whatever, and it wasn’t recorded, and no one even took notes. Now, we are trying to figure out exactly what we said. Well? There really isn’t any scientific way to get a handle on what happened, because there’s no way to investigate such specific events of the past (some can be, but that depends on this and that.) We have to just rely on our memories, and that’s our tough luck. That’s not the only case, and more interesting than extreme metaphysical challenges like, “What is the operational definition of the statement, ‘things continue to exist even while not being observed’?”

By: Dave/Bellingham

Dave/Bellingham — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:59:00 +0000

While I was getting my AA at Seattle Central they really freaked me out. In almost every class there was one person who would try and derail everything in order to talk about LaRouche. That was mostly in Political Science and History courses, though reading this made me glad I didn’t take physics there. There was a few times when I’d be walking by their table on the way to class and one of them would grab my arm and not let go until I was able to twist myself free.

Thankfully they seem to be more rare up here at Western. They’ve got a regular table outside the co-op and hand out leaflets at the farmers market, but none of the more aggressive tactics. I really don’t like them.

By: Perfect Day : Sharp Sand

Perfect Day : Sharp Sand — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 01:09:45 +0000

[...] with questions that fail to serve human needs. Scientistic philosopher, many scientists, & a great number of the backlash atheists / rationalists now posting on the internet misread “postmodernism” (& Rorty & Foucault, etc. usually without having read [...]

By: Pomo = LaRouchian wingnuttery? « Foucault blog

Pomo = LaRouchian wingnuttery? « Foucault blog — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 12:35:03 +0000

[...] Or, of Lyndon LaRouch, who is apparently making a comeback on campuses and who attracted the ire of this science-based blog for his interest in [...]

By: Pau

Pau — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 11:12:40 +0000

Actually, almost 50 % of people are below average. Of the rest, 50% are below average in each trait you care to consider.

By: Ben

Ben — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 07:40:35 +0000

Mark,
When someone criticizes “scientism” they usually aren’t criticizing the practice of science, as such. “Scientism” gets used in a couple of different ways (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism) but usually means something like (1) trying to inappropriately gussy up an outside-the-sciences study with the language of science, or (2) asserting that the knowledge and/or methodology of the hard sciences are superior to or have dominion over the rest of the squishy liberal arts.

Most of the hard feelings about this (small subclass of) scientists vs post-modernism probably date back to some late 90s culture-wars clashes fomented by people like Paul Gross, Norman Levitt, and Alan Sokal. In my opinion, [some] people on both sides behaved like jerks, and ultimately from a intellectual point of view it was a sideshow. A few years later, everything goes on more or less as before for both scientists and literary critics, as it should, and the only trace left is the hard feelings.

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 02:26:51 +0000

LaRoche is still around? He must be ancient by now. I remember his half hour television programs during presidential campaigns, probably 30 years ago, in which he would pontificate about his twisted ideas. He was weird and creepy back then too. It’s a good thing that LaRoche and Cheney are both males and can’t reproduce together — I shudder to think of the spawn of hell they could make between them.

By: joseph duemer

joseph duemer — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 02:00:09 +0000

I guess I’m above average, having graduated from the UW with a degree in English in 1978. Don’t know where my last post went, in which I tried to respond to Mark. Seems to have been eaten by the machine.

By: M@

M@ — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 00:35:13 +0000

Interesting. While taking a graduate degree in journalism a few years ago, I wrote a paper about Lyndon LaRouche, having accepted some literature from supporters at a traffic signal in Washington, D.C.

He’s definately got a cult following.

By: satisfier

satisfier — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 00:02:04 +0000

At UW, at least, all the students are above average.

are you really that needy ?