Hi Glenn, Rick, others
> As for providing examples of science recognizing social values, you'd
> have to
> look into the social sciences, and I'm sure you'd have no trouble
> finding
> them there, Boaz aside.
True; the social sciences study social values. But at least in
psychology (my major) there is a strong tendency to 'psychologize'
values. Everything is 'just' between the ears. That's true in biological
psychology, where one studies e.g. the influences of certain chemicals
that cross the blood-brain barrier and thus can influence the brain and
thus can influence behavior, but also in personality psychology (look at
how 'impersonal' the Big Five personality dimensions are!), economical
psychology, of course clinical psychology and cognitive psychology,
cultural psychology (although they try to 'reduce' behavior to culture
as well of course.), and even religion psychology. It's I believe less
so the case in developmental psychology and social psychology. But
eveluating psychology as a whole (which it actually isn't!), there's
this heritage of the physical sciences not only to be as 'objective' as
possible (explaining cognition in terms of algoritms run in the wetware
of the brain, for instance, as in cognitive psychology), but to treat
the psyche as dependend on the brain which is just an organ with a
highly accidental (one is inclined to say 'meaningless') phylogenetical
and ontogenetical history...
But why is that? Why does psychology psychologize so much? Take
neurology. When you get local anesthetics in your mouth so that the
dentist can take your rotten tooth away, you don't feel any pain,
because the information channel in your mouth towards the brain has been
'cut' momentarily. If you, on the other hand, stimulate the nerve very
close to the brain with small electrical signals, you'll see these
action potentials hurry along to your brain, and then you will feel
pain. The same story goes for all the senses. And think about accidents
or tumors damaging the brain; what you get are certain cognitive
malfunctions.
So as a pragmatical, objective scientist, you conclude that the mind is
dependend on the brain. And then you arrive at the vision that all our
experiences are just complex movements of an essentially dead,
mechanical, material thing.
Any suggestions how to overcome this SOM view on our experiences? ;-)
Greetings, Patrick.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.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 - 16:02:19 BST