History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

The question of anti-science: flipping the bird at Big Science

May 25th, 2011 · 1 Comment

The question of anti-science is obviously controversial: if you adopt that stance you should find one to five science subjects to study to keep up a balance.
But my point is that science kowtowing has gone on so long everyone is failing to see that scientists have their head up their ass on multiple fronts. Noone can see stupidity hiding behind ‘science smarts’. And most scientists really are stupid: look at Stephen Hawking declaring philosophy dead. eh?
It is grotesque, and the Dr. Kildare wunderkind science phase is getting a bit thin. The problem of course is that the achievements of technology tend to mesmerize the public into pliant submission to the whole pack of absurdities now being concocted by science jocks, next to much useful research no doubt.

Keep in mind that these people are almost always badly educated, specializing in science from the beginning and unable to discourse on anything else, until finally the shibboleths of new atheism empower people to pronounce on everything.

I think science is reaching critical failure in the midst of its success, and we are going to enter a post-scientific age, buried in technologcial scientism to be sure, as predicted by many.

In any case, we need a new educational system, one that can break the cycle of the meritocratic entrapment of the very intelligent who are then overspecialized to the point of narrowness. Such people make good defenders of the status quo, but they are shallow and stupid inside their smarts.

There were a series of warnings here, the last classic being the Weberian Iron Cage theme. And a warning.

to put this in perspective: the entire cadre of high IQ scientists is incapable, and I mean incapable, of seeing any problem with Darwinism.
That’s the grim sign, checkmate is nigh.

Tags: General