He definitely seems to privilege science over the humanities/politics. In class we were talking about how science and other disciplines have been converging in environmental discourse over the last 50 years, which I think is good because it more accurately reflects the way we view the interactions between the world and humans/others.
the author of this article is casting the convergence in a bad light, saying that we're destroying the authority of science by not waiting for "absolute" scientific truths. The problem is that we will never really have an absolute, unquestionable "truth".. even from science.
I laughed and was slightly offended when he wrote, "hard science has become just another faction, as politicized and 'messy' as, say, gender". I'm just sayin, I would have used the term "complex" instead of messy..
I thought this article was interesting.
ReplyDeleteHe definitely seems to privilege science over the humanities/politics. In class we were talking about how science and other disciplines have been converging in environmental discourse over the last 50 years, which I think is good because it more accurately reflects the way we view the interactions between the world and humans/others.
the author of this article is casting the convergence in a bad light, saying that we're destroying the authority of science by not waiting for "absolute" scientific truths. The problem is that we will never really have an absolute, unquestionable "truth".. even from science.
I laughed and was slightly offended when he wrote, "hard science has become just another faction, as politicized and 'messy' as, say, gender". I'm just sayin, I would have used the term "complex" instead of messy..