ROG:
I certainly never read Pirsig to hold such an extreme position (and what is a
'pomo'?). In fact, I think he would agree with you and define such a process
above as social, not as derived from social.
I've never explicitly heard Pirsig to hold such a position either, but if
you read some pomo (postmodern) literature you will see the same tell-tale
catch-phrases that Pirsig uses: "socially derived" and "socially mediated".
I think he's either been genuinely influenced by these ideas and those of
Science Studies, or he's simply eager to reiterate anything that knocks
science down a notch or two that sounds remotely plausible, even if he
doesn't fully buy into it himself. Remember, these methods of
argumentation are valuable, and considered fair game, from a sophist
perspective.
ROG:
I interpret Pirsig as implying something more subtle than this. He is
stating that intellect emerges out of the social and thus shares a common
worldview or way of looking at things and that this brings an inherent bias
to science.
Perhaps, but worldviews are really philosophical - intellectual, not social.
If you're arguing that SOM is a set of social patterns, then yes, I could
agree. Of course, if your interpretation is correct then why didn't he just
say it like you did?
ROG:
Another take on the issue is that I think we could argue that proper science
depends upon a certain social worldview. In other words, all science emerges
out of a common relevent set of beliefs, without which one can't really be
said to be a 'scientist'. The indoctrination is now called a PHD. This would
obscure our ability to see most social effects in various theories as they
would tend to be endemic in all science.
Sorry, but this is a kind of argument that bothers me. First a claim is made
and then wishy-washy excuses are made for why the claim can't be justified.
(Besides, if you do not have a PHD in physics, Roger, then you are not
indoctrinated and the social effects on various theories of physics should
not be obscured from you. Tell me what they are.)
ROG:
There is some evidence of problems with some branches of science in the
old Soviet Union. Socialist propaganda led to invalid assumptions on
genetics and this led to some examples of BAD science (non science).
I'm not denying that certain fields of science feel social pressures,
like research intended to examine the health effects of smoking that
are funded by tobacco companies. I was wondering, however, what social
patterns could possibly influence the work done in physics and chemistry.
ROG:
The statement that science could also be biologically derived comes
immediately prior to the Descartes paragraph.
Thanks. I'll look at that when I have the book in front of me.
ROG:
As for your question of whether Pirsig's 'myth' implies a 'conspiracy' or
just a pre-intellectual set of beliefs, please refer to David's opus
yesterday.
Huh? I merely stated that Pirsig hinted at a conspiracy - that
the claim of independence was a trick scientists used to distance
themselves from the wrath of the church. I never said anything about
"a pre-intellectual set of beliefs", which by the way is another
oxymoron. I didn't read David's opus.
ROG:
I think you are oversimplifying the term dynamic in this context. It doesn't
just mean change, it also refers to the ability to explore and create new
patterns of quality.
No. Like Rod, you are reading into the term 'dynamic' in this context.
Here he just means by dynamic that science is provisional. Science has an
eraser. The ability to explore and create new patterns of quality are due
not to this but to science being objective and demanding consistency
between ideas and evidence. Pirsig thinks it's due to scientists being
open to Dynamic insights, but here 'Dynamic' and 'dynamic' are not
equivalent, as I explained in the other thread.
ROG:
Social evolution is incomparably faster than biological evolution.
Science has similarly accelerated the pace of creative exploration.
No doubt.
Glenn
--__________________________________________________________________ Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:53 BST