Newsgroups: talk.origins,sci.skeptic,alt.postmodern,sci.lang,alt.feminism
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!news-server.ncren.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!murdoch!usenet
From: dcs2e@darwin.clas.virginia.edu (David Swanson)
Subject: Re: Scientific Epistomology, or "Social Text" Editors Make Ted 
 look like a Scientist
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ara-mac-228.itc.virginia.edu
Message-ID: <DrqFro.9Ev@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
X-Posted-From: InterNews 1.0.1@ara-mac-228.itc.virginia.edu
Sender: -Not-Authenticated-[9087]
Organization: University of Virginia
References: <Drou8w.9KF@eskimo.com> <4npup0$a2k@news2.tds.net>  
 <4nq298$ah7@news2.tds.net>
Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 01:50:12 GMT
Xdisclaimer: No attempt was made to authenticate the sender's name.
Lines: 28
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.skeptic:171722 sci.lang:53997

In article <4nq298$ah7@news2.tds.net>
david.jensen@mpcug.com (David Jensen) writes:

> I am sure you have no idea what science is. Science, learning about the
> universe through the use of the scientific method, is inherently amoral.
> The fact that some scientists have behaved badly or in a fashion that
> damages others is not relevent to science, it is relevent to society.

Is this why anal-ytic philosphers are all the time shouting "I have as
much concern for human flourishing as anyone" when all you wanted to
ask them was what page to turn to?  Is this why some guy (Richard
somethingorother I think) keeps writing to tell me things like "We can
have thought without language - just read Steven Pinker" quite
oblivious to the non sequitur, and asking me what I know about science
so that he can mold his discussion to my ignorance, though he knows
damn well he's only writing for his own sake?  Is this why (to pick a
victim from the opposing camp) Heidegger thought Nazism was no big deal
insofar as the only thing that matters is Real work?  Of course an
asshole can be a great scientist (or philosopher), but mediocre
scientists needn't try so hard to prove it.



David
"It is interesting to note that the death penalty for individuals is
less controversial than the mere suggestion that a few corporations may
have forfeited their right to exist.  How many people does a company
have to harm before we question if it ought to exist?" Paul Hawken
