<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7233.69">
<TITLE>Re: [iDC] reading list // religious mediated spaces</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText75762 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>I know that this is how we
are meant to think in humanities-world, and that it makes us feel warm and
comfortable inside, but I wonder...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>Objectivity died with quantum physics, and
any statement is dependent on its language. Yes to both, up to a point; but
quantum physics is not contradictory in its mathematical formulation (Feynman is
good on this), only when that is translated into words, so maybe one statement
cuts against the other.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>Kuhn underestimates the extent to which
scientific ideas build on each other; his classic case--of relativity--really
works against his argument, since Newtonian physics was retained (and is still
of course used) in many situations. And, of course, scientists (like anyone
else) are often conservative and like to defend ideas they have put a lot of
work into. So what? At least they have more of an idea than many in the
humanities about what counts as a counter-example, and theories do get
discredited.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>In a way this argument reflects those in
theory of photography, in which it was rightly said that photographs are never
entirely objective; they reflect the subjectivities of their makers and users;
they are ideological, and so on. But does this mean that there is no objective
element present at all, as some theorists of the 1970s onwards would have us
believe? That we wouldn't rather have a UFO sighting recorded by a group of
amateur photographers than amateur watercolourists?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>Likewise with science, if you really
believe there is no objectivity there (as Gellner put it) you have the problem
of explaining how we moved from being five thousand years ago a few scattered
roving bands of scavengers to corresponding globally like this now.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>Regards</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>Julian</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><BR>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> idc-bounces@bbs.thing.net on behalf of
John Saccà<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sun 10/09/2006 00:20<BR><B>To:</B> Simon
Biggs<BR><B>Cc:</B> idc@bbs.thing.net<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [iDC] reading list
// religious mediated spaces<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P><FONT size=2>2006/9/9, Simon Biggs <simon@littlepig.org.uk>:<BR>> To
me it seems<BR>> a given that science depends on an eternally sceptical view
of data of any<BR>> kind. In such a context belief must be
absent.<BR><BR>This view of science was refuted long ago by Thomas Kuhn and
Paul<BR>Feyerabend, among others. As Feyerabend pointed out (in
his<BR>_Philosophical Papers_), the terms in which any scientific
observation<BR>is expressed inevitably depend on a metaphysical ontology.
For<BR>example, in order to count things, you have to believe that
the<BR>universe is constituted in such a way that there are discrete
entites<BR>that can be counted.<BR><BR>Science cannot be exempt from
Wittgenstein's observation that the use<BR>of language depends, at some point,
on an unjustifiable belief that<BR>the words we use have coherent
meanings.<BR><BR>In very practical terms, as Kuhn showed in _The Structure
of<BR>Scientific Revolutions_, the pursuit of what he called "normal<BR>science"
depends on belief in a paradigm that justifies the costs and<BR>risks involved
in undertaking certain kinds of research rather than<BR>others. Far from
being an unfettered pursuit of scepticism, "normal<BR>science" (i.e. almost all
science) seeks mainly to extend the<BR>application of an existing paradigm,
whose validity is taken for<BR>granted. "Revolutionary science" occurs
when one paradigm is<BR>abandoned in favour of another. But the strength
of belief in the old<BR>paradigm, so necessary for the social cohesion of
scientific<BR>disciplines, often makes scientists resist revolutions with all
their<BR>might.<BR><BR>John<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>iDC
-- mailing list of the Institute for Distributed Creativity
(distributedcreativity.org)<BR>iDC@bbs.thing.net<BR><A
href="http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc">http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc</A><BR><BR>List
Archive:<BR><A
href="http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/">http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/</A><BR><BR><BR><BR></FONT></P></DIV>
<br><br>
<ADDRESS style="BACKGROUND: white; TEXT-ALIGN: center"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; BACKGROUND: white; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; BACKGROUND: white; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; BACKGROUND: white; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">This </SPAN></SPAN>e-mail, including any attachments, is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the use of </SPAN></ADDRESS>
<ADDRESS style="BACKGROUND: white; TEXT-ALIGN: center"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; BACKGROUND: white; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; BACKGROUND: white; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. Any unauthorised dissemination or copying of this e-mail or its attachments and </SPAN></ADDRESS>
<ADDRESS style="BACKGROUND: white; TEXT-ALIGN: center"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; BACKGROUND: white; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">any reliance on or use or disclosure of any information contained in them is strictly prohibited and may be illegal. If you have</SPAN></ADDRESS>
<ADDRESS style="BACKGROUND: white; TEXT-ALIGN: center"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; BACKGROUND: white; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"> received this e-mail in error please notify us by return of e-mail [or by telephone +44 (0) 20 7848 1272] and then delete it</SPAN></ADDRESS>
<ADDRESS style="BACKGROUND: white; TEXT-ALIGN: center"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; BACKGROUND: white; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"> from your system</SPAN></ADDRESS><NOBR>
<P align=center><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"></FONT> </P>
<P align=left><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"> This message has been scanned for viruses by </FONT><A href="http://www.blackspider.com/"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" color=#000000>BlackSpider MailControl</FONT></A></P>
</body>
</HTML>