Post a response:
|
I've re-read my posts and his and I'm going to stick with everything I have written. I don't think he makes good points and he does strawman me by distorting my statements about science and attributing to me views I don't hold. I think that you may be engaging in a bit of that, yourself. I think you're failing to discern the difference between science as an evolving and contingent process with goals that are not immediately met - and with preliminary results that may be wrong = with the principles of scientific inquiry and methodology which have revolutionized humanity, mostly for the better. Individuals or groups working within science can get things very wrong but it's not because of science, it's because they're people. Science, itself, offers a remedy for these mistakes, one that is better than any other corrective process in human affairs. But it takes time and it takes a human-made organization that is willing to adhere to scientific principles. THAT'S where the problem is. Associating me with genocide or eugenics because I believe that science represents the pinnacle of human attainment - which it is - is, obviously, a calumny. The accusation of "scientism" is also a lot of fashionable bullshit now coming mostly from the left that doesn't withstand any level of critical scrutiny. Invariably, it is an accusation made by people with little understanding of either science or society who are looking for someone or something to blame for the world's problems using simplistic and clichéd views of who they think is to blame. They almost always get this wrong. The "soft sciences" to which you referred are, indeed, in a pretty terrible state. That is largely because of the awfulness of universities, today, particularly in the humanities and in the squishier sciences of psychology and sociology. That is because they intersect with culture which is, as most of us might agree, currently utterly depraved. That does not mean that there isn't an underlying science worth exploring, or absolutely valuable science being conducted, in those realms, it means they're vulnerable to culture wars and naked political agendas. So, I'm probably completely in agreement with Bruce, here. I'll ask him about it. If we are ever to step out of our degraded and debased positions in society, it WILL be because science supports us and because the broader scientific virtues of evidence and empirical reasoning prevail. We turn our backs on science at our peril. |