Freethought & Rationalism Archive

luvluv · 07-02-2002, 04:51 PM

I think Berry's point was against the notion that science = knowledge = inevitablegood. He argued that regression is just as much a possibility as inevitable progression. He treats the belief in inevitable scientific progress as a religous belief. He isn't against ignorance he is against being naive, which is what he believes you would have to believe to believe that an increase in knowledge alone will make humanity better.

shinobi909 · 07-03-2002, 05:19 AM

I havn't read the book, but I think the dude sounds like he has some valid points. I don't think there is anything wrong with science, rather it's applications in the service of a corporate-millitary system.

This is a good artice that brings up valid points about the application of science.

<a href="http://www.zmag.org/ScienceWars/anti_rationalism.htm" target="_blank">http://www.zmag.org/ScienceWars/anti_rationalism.htm</a>

[ July 03, 2002: Message edited by: shinobi909 ]

Vorkosigan · 07-04-2002, 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by luvluv:
He says that reductionism is useful but it is not entirely true, it is an abstraction. He doesn't say materialism is untrue but that it is limited by human knowledge and that it is applied beyond our ability to apply it. Maybe it's nothing you haven't heard but I have been told that the guy is one of the country's top two or three essayists, but you might be able to dispute that. (Maybe that's what I get for believing book jackets!)

I'm sure he is one of the country's top essayists. I just haven't read him, had to go on what he said. Being a good writer, however, does not make one smart about things. <shrug> Some people obviously believe that science = human progress, but this is a belief about science that says nothing about science, only about the believers. Some observers apt to confuse beliefs about science with science itself. I don't think any serious thinker out there thinks increasing knowledge alone will make things better, but it certainly can't hurt.

Vorkosigan

ishalon · 07-04-2002, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by luvluv:
I think Berry's point was against the notion that science = knowledge = inevitablegood. He argued that regression is just as much a possibility as inevitable progression. He treats the belief in inevitable scientific progress as a religous belief. He isn't against ignorance he is against being naive, which is what he believes you would have to believe to believe that an increase in knowledge alone will make humanity better.

Is he arguing that science does not = good? most people think the world is better off today than back when the world used to be flat

07-04-2002, 05:56 PM

Quote:

He says that reductionism is useful but it is not entirely true, it is an abstraction.

I find many criticisms of reductionism to be misguided. Might you elaborate a bit on what he means by "not entirely true"?

nogods4me · 07-05-2002, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ishalon:

most people think the world is better off today than back when the world used to be flat

well, there are certainly fewer ships sailing off the edge, aren't there.

Boro Nut · 07-05-2002, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by luvluv:
Well, he does take on materialism and reductionism in the begining of the book, and the "hubris" that science produces

Isn't hubris that lovely brown bread with bits in? I loved that stuff. Why would you want to get rid of it?

Boro Nut

Boro Nut · 07-10-2002, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by luvluv:
Has anyone read Life is a Miracle by Wendell Berry?

No, but I doubt very much that it is.

Boro Nut

07-03-2002, 05:19 AM	#12
shinobi909 Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 93	I havn't read the book, but I think the dude sounds like he has some valid points. I don't think there is anything wrong with science, rather it's applications in the service of a corporate-millitary system. This is a good artice that brings up valid points about the application of science. <a href="http://www.zmag.org/ScienceWars/anti_rationalism.htm" target="_blank">http://www.zmag.org/ScienceWars/anti_rationalism.htm</a> [ July 03, 2002: Message edited by: shinobi909 ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-02-2002, 04:51 PM	#11
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	I think Berry's point was against the notion that science = knowledge = inevitablegood. He argued that regression is just as much a possibility as inevitable progression. He treats the belief in inevitable scientific progress as a religous belief. He isn't against ignorance he is against being naive, which is what he believes you would have to believe to believe that an increase in knowledge alone will make humanity better.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.