Showing posts with label rationality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rationality. Show all posts

Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science Review

Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Are you looking to buy Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science? Here is the right place to find the great deals. we can offer discounts of up to 90% on Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science. Check out the link below:

>> Click Here to See Compare Prices and Get the Best Offers

Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science ReviewThis book, by Paul Gross and Norman Levitt, both scientists (the former a biologist, the latter a mathematician), airs the grievances of science against the new post-modernist movement in the academia.
A movement that started as a deconstructionist method of literary criticism, postmodernism is now a way of thinking that is proposed by some proponents as an explanatory method for everything, including science. Briefly, post-modernism proposes that science is nothing more than a cultural construct, and has no more objective validity than any other form of knowledge. While natural sciences have remained untouched by this movement, it is taking over the social sciences, spurred over by the latter's failures at establishing its scientific basis as firmly as the former has done.
The subtitle of this book is "the academic left and its quarrels with science", and suitably, the first two chapters discuss politics. While politics should, ideally, be informed by science, it is a sad fact that science is also often informed by politics. The Academic Left demands that, rather than using science to inform the political process, the reverse should happen : feminist postmodernism demands "a complete overthrown of traditional gender categories", racial justice entails a society which prioritizes "black values" (in this case, Afrocentrism - the idea that Africa and black people are inherently superior), and environmental postmodernism "envisons a trancendence of the values of Western industrial society and the restoration of an imagined prelapsarian harmony to humanity's relations with nature".
The most used method to effect these views of the world is postmodernism, that is, the view that our ideological system (including science) is under the purview of cultural constructivism, that is, a product of the culture it exists in. It was first a product of literary criticism and history, places where no doubt it had much use, but is now widespread. Variants of this view posit that science is really a bourgeois construct, or the product of gender bias, or of a one-sided Western perspective, or of an impulse to objectify nature and alienate man from direct experience of nature.
Chapter 5 to 7 are worth the price of admission alone. Here, the authors examine the desperate attempts by "feminist" postmodernists (chapter 5), "environmentalist" postmodernists (chapter 6) and other movements - "anti-AIDS", animal rights, Afrocentrism (chapter 7). Note that I put their position in quotes : as I have mentioned earlier, what the postmodernist holders of these ideologies seek is not a reasoned position but brute social revolution thru obliteration of knowledge.
The most remarquable conclusion of these examinations is that, while the postmodernists in these disciplines claim that science is a social construct, they have very little actual evidence (the mere attempt to provide evidence is surprising, in the view that any ideology is a construct : we would expect total presuppositionalism here, but like any such people, they are forced to at least try).
For example, the best feminist attack against science we have are that : the little problems in math books (you know, the if-John-gives-half-his-money-to-Jill type of problems for children) are too white-male-oriented, and that the language used to describe sperm-ovula interactions are too aggressive. We have the idea that technological societies hate life more than others, and that to eat animals is born out of a desire to control.
The authors elegantly dispatch such nonsense and give us a bird's eye view of the biggest publications on the subject. The field is highly entertaining, and they do not hesitate to say what they think, even though science can be un-PC in many circumstances (such as when fighting Afrocentric myths). They state at the beginning that they intend to take no quarters, and they don't.
Science, despite its faults, is the crowning achievement of Western Enlightment. Books like "Higher Superstition" make us reflect on the intellectual threats to our future, and forces each of us to take a position. Despite some small ideological flaws, I give this book a hearty four out of five.Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science Overview

Want to learn more information about Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science?

>> Click Here to See All Customer Reviews & Ratings Now
Read More...

Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond To The Redesigned Human Of The Future Review

Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond To The Redesigned Human Of The Future
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Are you looking to buy Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond To The Redesigned Human Of The Future? Here is the right place to find the great deals. we can offer discounts of up to 90% on Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond To The Redesigned Human Of The Future. Check out the link below:

>> Click Here to See Compare Prices and Get the Best Offers

Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond To The Redesigned Human Of The Future ReviewI found "Citizen Cyborg" quite readable, and James Hughes brings up a number of interesting arguments against both the bio-Luddite and libertarian-Extropian views of human transformation through technological means. Regarding the latter, Hughes points to the contradiction between the Extropians' desire to re-engineer naturally evolved biology without limits, versus their taboo against intervening into the evolved "spontaneous orders" of markets. Ironically the Extropians' guru F.A. Hayek in "The Fatal Conceit" asserts that we cannot rationally control the direction of an evolved system of any sort, even in principle. But Extropians deliberately ignore that aspect of Hayek's philosophy because it conflicts with their biological agenda.
I also like how Hughes treats the futurist philosopher F.M. Esfandiary (who also called himself FM-2030) as a serious thinker. Many of FM-2030's speculations about the values and lifestyles of "Future Man" sound more plausible now than when he first promoted them in the 1970's and 1980's, and I would like to see his contributions receive more recognition.
I find fault with Hughes's book in the following areas, however:
1. He puts too much emphasis on the technology of baby-making, maybe he because writes for a "family values" friendly American readership, at a time when most developed democratic countries now face population declines, especially Japan. It looks as if people in democracies have better things to do than planning to create genetically improved offspring.
2. He doesn't deal with the threat Peak Oil poses to the future of technological civilization.
3. He fails to address the fact that aging people for the most part can't or won't integrate novelty and additional risks into their lives, and what this means for the acceptance of new technologies in aging democratic societies.
4. He doesn't explain how Transhumanism would address the conflict of secular modernity versus third-world christianity and traditional Islam.
5. He assumes that everyone will behave himself to thrash out all these policy issues through democratic processes, instead of looking for shortcuts to get his way.
6. And, he assumes that the people with superior energy, ability and ambition, regardless of their social origins, will just tolerate living under democratic rule, instead of using their enhancements to challenge the authorities, like Magneto from the X-Men mythos. (A few years ago I asked: How do we handle the prospect of the Evil Transhuman? Answer: Plan on becoming the first one!) Many philosophers have long recognized that most people (the vulgar) live closer to the animal level than a relative handful of humans who have greater capacity for cognition and achievement. These natural aristocrats chafe now under the regime of the vulgar -- so why wouldn't they use enhancements to break free from social-political constraints and start making their own rules?
Maybe Hughes will address these issues in the future books I've heard he plans to write. I find it unfortunate that this one seems to have fallen dead-born from the press, compared with the best-selling book Ray Kurzweil published about future technologies. I hope "Citizen Cyborg" can get its second wind, because the questions it raises will require social responses much sooner than we think.Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond To The Redesigned Human Of The Future Overview

Want to learn more information about Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond To The Redesigned Human Of The Future?

>> Click Here to See All Customer Reviews & Ratings Now
Read More...