tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post8906992495698140538..comments2024-03-28T02:54:46.537-04:00Comments on The TOF Spot: A Darwinist Mob?TheOFloinnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-15550228960652357382014-01-12T23:34:41.597-05:002014-01-12T23:34:41.597-05:00Yes. This post has been a joy, a clarifying treasu...Yes. This post has been a joy, a clarifying treasure in my thus far three day reading binge to exorcise the effects of reading an article in Politico, in which the comments were full of statements that Melissa Harris-Perry can't be a public intellectual because she doesn't have the breadth (delusion) that Jared Diamond does. <br /><br />Steve Pinker stinks on ice, and it's sadly obvious why they hate postmodernism--- it suggests that the whole world isn't responsible for washing his balls. <br /><br />Now I will plow into "The Myths We Live By" (thank you) and will be back to re-read for amusement, edification, and further reading of links provided. <br /><br />Reading this is the most fun I've had in ages. Thank you very, very much.wileyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10234314999465951053noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-26880204909449124262013-03-28T05:02:59.103-04:002013-03-28T05:02:59.103-04:00Steven Pinker et al as Eric Cartman? "Respec...Steven Pinker et al as Eric Cartman? "Respect my authority!"Jeremiahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17009592695869119717noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-37823525153937602472013-03-26T10:09:38.822-04:002013-03-26T10:09:38.822-04:00Pinker, summarized: "I'm not saying that ...Pinker, summarized: "I'm not saying that this is about winning the culture war, and that Nagel needs to keep his mouth shut lest he undermine our authority. It's just that THE WORLD IS GONNA END IF WE DON'T WIN THE CULTURE WAR, AND NAGEL NEEDS TO KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT CAUSE HE'S UNDERMINING OUR AUTHORITY!"The Deucehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09664665914768916965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-14778144166081840912013-03-20T00:21:36.231-04:002013-03-20T00:21:36.231-04:00This led Steven Pinker to tweet on “the shoddy rea...<i>This led Steven Pinker to tweet on “the shoddy reasoning of a once-great thinker.”</i><br /><br />This is Steven Pinker, memologist, mind you.The Deucehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09664665914768916965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-18376361619664343892013-03-19T12:23:26.983-04:002013-03-19T12:23:26.983-04:00A fine reply. I am as antipathetic to religion as ...A fine reply. I am as antipathetic to religion as any of the New Atheists, but the comments to the <i>New Republic</i> diary piece made me <i>almost</i> annoyed enough to purchase a subscription simply to rebut them. <br /><br />Well, not really, but I am happy that the Olde Topologist found a way to reply, and to expose that particular mob of hyenas, including the Peevin' Stinker, for what they are.Al_de_Barannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-18199439476770150012013-03-16T22:17:24.580-04:002013-03-16T22:17:24.580-04:00By the way, on a related note, I came across this ...By the way, on a related note, I came across <a href="http://io9.com/does-the-new-pope-believe-in-evolution-453874239" rel="nofollow">this article</a> today, which is just a sad piece of writing. I'm not even Catholic and it had me screaming at my computer screen with how painfully <i>wrong</i> it is. This is the real kicker:<br /><br /><i>It’s a “want my cake and eat it too” proposition that largely ignores the potency of Darwin’s dangerous idea as a God killer.</i><br /><br />A God-killer? A <i>God-killer</i>? Does this guy even know what he's talking about?<br /><br />Luckily io9 commenters are somewhat smarter than TNR commenters, and many called out how philosophically illiterate this piece was. So, that was encouraging.jmhenryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10108615537455993311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-1257100799095641072013-03-16T22:05:21.991-04:002013-03-16T22:05:21.991-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.jmhenryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10108615537455993311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-91840229665141759202013-03-16T22:03:00.683-04:002013-03-16T22:03:00.683-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.jmhenryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10108615537455993311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-5005681603727500452013-03-16T21:58:59.706-04:002013-03-16T21:58:59.706-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.jmhenryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10108615537455993311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-47600152859189438742013-03-16T21:57:10.287-04:002013-03-16T21:57:10.287-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.jmhenryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10108615537455993311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-38994253855318165082013-03-16T15:07:39.433-04:002013-03-16T15:07:39.433-04:00Precisely. It's not the matter, but the form....Precisely. It's not the matter, but the form. Homeostasis is one of the four powers of the vegetative soul. It is, as it were, the "motion" or "action" of the matter; but it is not the matter itself. TheOFloinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-3696421833968901672013-03-16T14:55:57.010-04:002013-03-16T14:55:57.010-04:00Oddly enough, I have always considered Mr. Pinker&...Oddly enough, I have always considered Mr. Pinker's book, "The Blank Slate" as particularly instrumental in driving me back to exploring Church teachings. The book is full of those crazy evolutionary psychology claims, which took an aspect of human nature and then speculated how it might have been pleasing to the gods of natural selection somehow, somewhere down the line of human descent; my younger self found them fascinating, but I have since wised to it. There is, however, a very interesting chapter in which he muses over how his discovery that man has a definite and imperfect (dare I say, fallen?) nature would effect politics. Because he places man's imperfections inwardly (specifically in the genes) he must reject any political theory that says that purely outward changes can perfect man, such as revolutionary Marxism. He then frets that this gives far too much comfort to rightward or, God forbid, traditionally religious notions of politics and anthropology. Pinker then hastily ended the chapter assuring his readers that a vague, less ambitious secular leftism can still be supported, and he has being trying with all his might to defend that narrow plot of ground ever since. I, however, did not share the man's prejudices, and immediately struck out to find out more about the ancient traditions that had somehow gotten the most basic truths of anthropology more right than the most learned men of the age. The rest, as they say, is history.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12345891202347274863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-68927804726930561192013-03-16T14:54:20.981-04:002013-03-16T14:54:20.981-04:00Only now are Late Moderns and Post Moderns finding...<i>Only now are Late Moderns and Post Moderns finding the holes in the Enlightenment mythos.</i><br /><br />That reminds me: I'm currently reading Alasdair MacIntyre's book <i>After Virtue</i> for the first time. Great stuff.<br /><br />Re Steven Pinker:<br /><br /><i>The "argument" is that "Nagel should shut up because he gives aid and comfort to the enemy."</i><br /><br />And this guy has the audacity to criticize Nagel's reasoning, when his objections amount to nothing more than saying, "Nagel's argument will impede our efforts to do Great Things(tm)!"<br /><br />Anyway, this whole post was just entertaining. Thank you.jmhenryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10108615537455993311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-14118644825935259852013-03-16T13:41:09.840-04:002013-03-16T13:41:09.840-04:00"It cannot be a matter of mere matter since a..."It cannot be a matter of mere matter since a recently dead petunia consists of all the same matter in the same arrangement as a live petunia. Yet the former acts like a mere bag of chemicals while the latter acts like a petunia. That is, the latter is in self-motion while the former is simply acted upon."<br /><br />Well, I'm sure the material composition between a live and recently dead petunia is similar enough, but I don't know about the "same arrangement" part. One key aspect of living thing is homeostasis, which is when the parts maintain a dynamic balance (of nutrients, wastes, temperature, etc) for the sake of the whole. When this balance is lost, death may ensue. Static equilibrium is bad news for a living thing. I think that dynamic equilibrium counts as a different "arrangement" of matter than static equilibrium.FZnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-59854988925184604452013-03-16T09:41:24.668-04:002013-03-16T09:41:24.668-04:00Yah, it's funny how people who always insisted...Yah, it's funny how people who always insisted that science deals only with objective facts and specifically excludes the subjective gets all upset when Nagel points out that consciousness is subjective and therefore, by the definition of the scientific revolution, is not covered by the methods of natural science. TheOFloinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-55338588600073777042013-03-16T08:35:21.810-04:002013-03-16T08:35:21.810-04:00This led Steven Pinker to tweet on “the shoddy rea...<i>This led Steven Pinker to tweet on “the shoddy reasoning of a once-great thinker.” </i><br /><br />The really impressive irony is that the reasoning Nagel is using is the same kind of reasoning he has always used. Nagel has <i>always</i> argued that our current scientific approaches can't adequately handle various phenomena consciousness; it's what made his career, arguing that scientific inquiry would have to go in new and very different directions in order to give an adequate explanation of consciousness (particularly what he called its first-personal aspects). All he has done in recent times is to generalize this and argue that these same issues are symptomatic of much broader problems, which can be analyzed in closely analogous ways. So how can he be a once-great thinker if his use of the same kind of reasoning that made him well-known now makes him a shoddy reasoner? Brandonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06698839146562734910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-63377902057868759602013-03-16T01:41:00.217-04:002013-03-16T01:41:00.217-04:00As for the scientismists, I wish there existed any...As for the scientismists, I wish there existed any one of them who could remember that at one time geocentrism was not only the popularly accepted scientific consensus but, by Ockham's razor, actually made *more* sense than heliocentrism (Galileo did not have a telescope of sufficient power to confirm the stellar parallax that heliocentric theory required).<br /><br />Increases in knowledge are as like as not to *dis*prove any given theory as confirm it, which is why humility and the willingness to admit the possibility of error or incompleteness are critical attributes of the real scientific method.Stephen J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17731801189076630997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-80845656314799058232013-03-16T01:31:24.332-04:002013-03-16T01:31:24.332-04:00Mr. Moore, I would applaud you and cheer vociferou...Mr. Moore, I would applaud you and cheer vociferously should I ever witness that.Stephen J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17731801189076630997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-77636253468500684602013-03-16T00:58:46.560-04:002013-03-16T00:58:46.560-04:00Great post.
This reminds me of a quip someone ma...Great post. <br /><br />This reminds me of a quip someone made about coverage of the Conclave - it is as if the commentators were to say: The Chicago Bears need to draft a point guard to address their relief pitching issues. <br /><br />My daydream: that some local college will hold a Science versus Creationism debate, and I stand up during the question period, and ask for a show of hands for people from the Comp Lit, La Rasa, LGBT Studies, Sociology, Psychology - anyone who uses Critical Theory or Power Dynamic Analysis in their classrooms. <br /><br />Then turn to the Defenders of Science, and say: these folks teach - and hand out degrees in - fields whose basic assertion about reality is that Science is at best one of a number of equally valid world views, and at worst a tool used by patriarchal misogynistic elites to oppress the masses. Either passively or actively, they seek the destruction of science as you practice it. <br /><br />Meet your real enemies. Unlike creationists, they hold real power in your environment. Now, be brave enough to face them. Why are you not denouncing them? Joseph Moorehttp://yardsaleofthemind.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com