PLATT: As I explained in a previous post, today's belief in science when taken
to the extreme is just as mythic as any fundamentalist religion. Among the
myths of science are that the universe suddenly appeared by chance, that
matter/energy is the basis of all reality, that there is no purpose in
evolution and that the scientific method is the only legitimate way to
establish truth.
ERIN: I wanted to expand on this and ask for comments.
taken from pomo book
"Some narratives legitimatize themselves in the telling and legitimize
the society they are told in. The chanter does not have to argue or prove the
myth." Starting something "here is a myth" there is an understanding that
the truth in the story does not depend on the details of it.
Ex. Here is the myth of Bumba vomiting the moon as I have heard it
chanted. The man who chanted it is Pongo"
"But according to Lyotard, scientific discourse, unlike narrative
discourse cannot legitmize itself. Here
Lyotard draws upon Wittgenstein. Wittgenstein in early work looked for the
perfect logical langauge that could state everything with clarity.
Jokes, poetry, chanting myths were meaningless.
Witt changed his mind. He began to see there are many language games we play.
In the language game of science the scientist makes denotative statements
rather then mythical ones.
Science must prove their theories and disprove others.
Science and narrative are different language games and what counts
as a good move in one does not count as a good move in the other.
What science cannot do is to legtimize its own activity. It cannot
answer questions such as "Why should society support scientific research"
Lyotard says that since science cannot legitimize itself it must
turn to narrative.
Metanarratives": French Enlightenment narrative and the German knowledge
narrative
Thus the successful Mars expedition of nanorover is part of the
metanarratives of the freedom, the liberation of humanity (french)
and the attainment of pure self-conscious spirit -the Unity of
all Knowledge (German)
(but these metanarratives challenged when science is used by
Nazi's to exterminate Jews and uncovers paradoxes (like in physics)
When science encounters paradoxes it abandons its search for decidable
truths and seeks to legitimize itself through perfomativity.
Science stops asking "What kind of research will unfold the laws of
nature" and beings asking "What kind of research will work best>
"best"-- gemerate more and more research.
So science is no longer concerned with truth but with performativity,
producing more research because the more research, the more proof, and
the more you seem right, and the more money and power you get.
Both science and the people chanting the Bumba chant can say
" We do what we do, because that's the way we do it."
Postmodernism is a society in which no one narrative big or little
no one language game dominates. This carnival of narratives replaces
the monolithic presence of one metanarrative.
So what about MoQ?
Anybody want to define the metanarrative, language game, of the MoQ etc
Erin
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