Monday, February 20, 2006

I still haven't read the whole article!

But here's somebody saying how stupid the writer of the article is.

...via Atrios.

...update. I just read the whole article ABOUT the article. It seems the writer of the article is the REAL Fuck-o. And the New York Times is the Fuck-o by association. Dennett, I don't know about his Fuck-o status. He seems to know more about philosophy than the fuck-o at the New York Times. But they all know more about philosophy than me. I just get touchy when people start defending or attacking science without any sensititivity to the ideas in the philosophy of science. The New York Times guy says that science and philosophy are separate. Therefore he's a Big Fat Fuck-O with a capital O.


Zentrout said...

I still have yet to see any proof that tintin, or any of his cohorts are part of the illuminati- he is the world's most eminent do-gooder and adventurer, and truly represants the world because he (with the exception of a few problems in africa) respects the international and their right to be free from gun-runners, slave-traders thieves and anarchists.

And as a further note, sir, I am truly insulted that you did not consult me, mor my sources in
your wild allegations.

And, I haven't read the article. I don't read things that don't have pictures next to them.

sarcasmus said...

Oh, how I pity you. The TINTINS got you in the brain, man. And there ain't no comin' back. The TINTINS got in there and they're telling you, man, that Tintin ain't the bad guy.

There's no use tellin you but the TINTINS got you suckered, cold. You read them TINTIN books and you see TINTIN do THIS TINTIN do THAT and there's no stoppin' the TINTIN in your brain to tell you that TINTIN done everything wrong so far--

I don't know how to reach you. I don't know how to make you see the light. Once the TINTIN get you in the head and then the SMURFS get up in there and there's no turning back. You're BRAINWASHED. You're BRAINWASHED. You got TINTIN in your head and TINTIN is all you got. ANd I just feel sorry for you. Just feel sorry for you. I'm telling you this only because I LOVE YOU. Sometimes LOVE HURTS. And this is my LOVE man, TINTIN is in your brain and you gotta get it out our you are never gonna see THE TRUTH!!!!!!!! Peace and love, brother.

to err is human said...

lots of scientists are fucktards.

much of the mess of the modern world cannot be blamed on the fundamentalists. they're to blame for the mess of the medieval world...

which was pretty bad... tho devoid of poison gas and car accidents and nucular bombs.

i don't really see any evidence that the rule of 'science' has done much more for the world than the other various creepy ideologies have. Pick a doctrine, and it has genuine saints of compassion, and also psycho robots who love torture. this works for science and christianity and buddhism and what have you.

On the other hand, TinTin has always kept his true agenda under wraps. You have to read between the lines. Let's just say he draws paychecks directly from the IMF and leave it at that.

to ero is divine said...

i don't buy this "his theism is as true or false as any other theism" bullshit.

there is no fixed quantity of theism.

god is not an on-off switch.

if the switch is in an up position, you're an enlightened scientist. if it's down, you're a stupid fanatic.

or vice versa.

duality is stupid.
duality is great.
tin on the one side, tin on the other.

Anthony said...

I have never liked brian leiter's utterly dismissive attitude about competing ideas. His account of Wieseltier's critique is as much of a "straw-man" as Wieseltier's critique of Dennett; subsequently I find his opinion more unhelpful than helpful.
As far as the debate itself, I too get reflexively defensive when science or reason falls under attack by uncritical spiritualists or "humanists", because they introduce many problems that need not be so, e.g. evolutionary theory, stem-cell research, etc. One always gets the sense from these people that they simply misunderstand the relevant issues. And of course we react to these people because we feel they threaten (rightly) secularism and free rational discourse.
But there are limits to rationality and science, or "scientism". Philosophically, my dispute with Dennett, Leiter, and the others is their (to me) disturbingly naive appreciation for science and scientific philosophy. I react violently to those threats to greater culture listed above; but I understand this as a reaction, a knee-jerk one at that, and I can separate valid criticism from dangerously unmitigated and unjustified enthusiasm.
I for one feel more comradery and more in common with the pro-science philosophers than with their typical opponents. If I had to err on any side, I would want to be on the side of critical inquiry, free rational discourse, encouragement of scientific awareness, etc. But I think my compatriots don't realize that the skeptics of the value of science really are using poor arguments; but their inability to provide reasonable critique is not proof that no reasonable critique exists. The valid and utterly necessary critique of science is a much more nuanced and subtle one than either side realizes. And this constitutes a large portion of what I feel is my lifetime philosophical project. Like Dewey stressed in his writings, science is valuable; but this value presupposes that science understands its place and office. In my view, science in and of itself is an interesting double-edged sword, and requires responsible use. Rampant scientism and its rationalist philosophical foundations turns a potentially wonderful tool into a dangerous one.
I used to throw my support unyieldingly towards the scientists in these debates every time, because I felt they understood the boundaries and responsibilities inherent to their work. But countless thinkers like Leiter really make me doubt now that they understand its boundaries and responsibilities any better than their wretched oppoenents, and I can't look at them as any more than knee-jerk reactionaries anymore. It makes me feel alienated.

sarcasmus said...

It's okay, Anthony. Tintin loves you. He loves all of us.