The Place and Value of Science

It could appear a little silly to say, but just flipping on the television set is proof enough.

Let me give you minimal accounts of not only advertising, but overlooked every day norms that should drop your jaw to the floor.

I don't usually watch the tube too often for obvious reasons, but the other day I was watching the children's network, Nickelodeon, and I couldn't help but notice all of the futuristic cartoons out there...IT'S ALL THEY'RE BASED ON! For example, Jimmy Neutron the 'boy genius' who is always up to some new invention that ends up disastrous, or "My Life As A Teenage Robot" where a female scientist invents a robotic daughter to fight evil, or "Danny Phantom" who taps into the ghost world due to his parents' malfunctioned invention, or as the theme goes "Danny Phantom who was just 14 when his parents built a very strange machine designed to view a world unseen"...

It's truly unfortunate that children are being fed this, and I haven't included Cartoon Network which has the same exact futuristic animation being poured out, which is no doubt owned by the same company...what is it, Viacom? There are only about 2 that own the majority, if not all of the media outlet, so that sort of narrows down the guess.

Children have been reading comic books and playing with technologically persuading action figures since the early 1900s in american culture, but it's accepted as creative and healthy.

And if that's not enough, the infomercials for the station are things like bouncing, playful icons and exciting, moving enticement to children who should be jumping about and playing, but instead are sitting in front of a tv screen and being subordinated by a massive corporation who knows how to tap into their psychology. I saw one where a schoolbus was letting the children off and the dialogue is something along the lines of "We know school is back in session so that's why we're bringing back to back new episodes from 4-8pm to fit your schedule" which for the children who are watching would entail coming home, flipping on the tv set until bedtime, and the next morning going back to the highly conventional image of sitting in a classroom, doing work, and coming home again. That is the life of our children; are they considered children? They might be, but it's blatant that they're commodities.

Then, for a little extra perturbance, an ADHD infomercial comes on this morning.

"Is your child suffering from ADHD? For more information, inquire for one of our pamphlets." They give the sky rocketing statistics and the jargon of "your child could have more potential than you think", and I'm just laying there soaking it in and going "Hyperactivity in children wouldn't be a problem; a threat to the system, if they were the cyborgs you're force feeding them to be!!" It's outrageous, and it kills me, because they will succeed with the drugging and the propaganda, and when they do, who will be there to lead the resistance? Who will be left a human?

Well, it was the morning news I was watching. Let's see, they had Barack Obama chit-chat, a high-heel stiletto marathon, and oh, the ground breaking cures for cancer and depression. See, now they just inject lab rats with a new, improved, patented chemical based medicine. Why are these rats depressed you ask? It might have something to do with experimental overcrowding. But remember us, like the rats, can be cured of reality with an injection of happiness- it has a ring to it; much like the McDonald's commercial I've recently been hearing geared towards children, "happy meals, an excellent source of happiness" Oh, I get it, that's why the nutrition fact chart is empty- we're consuming an emotion; not processed animal parts! And in Uganda there is a bacteria that's been identified to benefiting cancer research. They found out that it's missing in our diets, and not because of the region being indigenous for its growth; but because after our food products have been genetically altered, and sprayed with pesticides they somehow lose their nutrients, imagine that.

... the alternative being ... what?

Without mythos/ideology to set the stage for science - to provide values and purpose; to determine what questions are worth answering and what decisions require viable options; like, say, an ideology that presumes "the failure of society to evolve by centralizing valid knowledge to the conduct of human affairs" - what gives science its direction?

Science? How? In what way can it be said that the scientific method can be used to create a value? a purpose?

And even fabricating a thought experiment where science were able to conjure its own values, its own purpose ... what then? ... would humanity be valued? would saving humanity be its purpose? ... or would Thoreau have it right: "Men have become the tools of their tools."

... hmmmmmmmm - if science were indeed the perpetrator here, wouldn't every Jimmy Neutron "Boy Genius" episode end up with Jimmy discovering something truly fabulous? ... and yet it's always a disaster - sounds more like an anti-science statement to me! ... but it's probably neither - rather, just some LA suits hoping to increase their viewer base (and thus their advertising revenue) by being topical.

Now, I haven't read anything about this anarcho-primitivism, so take the following with a grain of salt ... certainly, a return to primitivism would exterminate Jimmy Neutron and his ilk - but given the world's current dependence on technology, wouldn't it also result in the extermination of a significant fraction of the human race through starvation and disease?

What would be the plot in his success?

And other anarcho-primitivists explain "transition" better than I, but what I can tell you is that there is an easy and a hard way; it's up to the public to decide how they want things to go.

The Transition

~edit~

Ah, and I found the producers of the cartoon for reference.
DNA Productions

Highly scientific oriented name, with their mascot, Paul the 3-eyed monkey.

It's not that behind the scenes we're being orchestrated as puppets intentionally, but are indeed... being orchestrated as puppets.

... if you don't give a crap about advertising revenue, the plot doesn't have to be good ... but since these cartoons are about advertising revenue and not about pro-science propaganda, they stick with what sells: topical slapstick ...



... or it could be that there is no way ... a hunter-gatherer lifestyle was the easy life - a couple of hours of work and the rest of the day was yours ... who in their right mind would trade that for an agricultural lifestyle of long hours and back-breaking labor? ... and yet here we find ourselves, the cultural descendants of an agricultural lifestyle ... a tipping point was passed and there was no turning back.

Is it technically possible to return to a more primitive way of life? ... sure - just drop an asteroid on the planet ... is it culturally possible to return to a more primitive way of life? ... maybe so, but probably not - at least not until we understand why we're not all still easy-going hunter-gatherers ... until we understand the tipping points we've passed, there's no way to even begin to try to erase them as barriers to regressing toward a simpler way of life.



... but the question remains: to whose ends? ... is this all one big mind-control experiment run by a community of mad scientists (in which case, you still can't blame "science"!), or is it just a matter of a random bunch of greedy capitalists trying to pay for their condos in the Bahamas?

Iconoclast,

I'd still very much like you to propose a quality-control mechanism by which science won't become an ideology unto itself. The Nazis were very keen on racial science, which was a direct and self-conscious outgrowth of Darwin's work. In fact the colonizing nations in Africa, esp the British, French, Belgians, Dutch, and Germans at the turn of the 20th century, used the same ideas to justify horrible mistreatment of local populations.

As you'll freely say, science is value-neutral. But humans are NOT, and they can corrupt science in ways not obvious until it's far too late.

Well, as long as we get this straight: I didn't say it was pro-science propaganda, and I apologize if it came across that way. I meant, simply, that it is pro-science and it is promoted by corporate industries.

I also wouldn't be so quick to judge the possibility of efficiently reforming. I advise you take a look at what other every-day-people have to contribute to the matter.

Listen to their proposals if you have the time! It may be a good source of info. (Keep in mind, however, this is 7/11- yikes)


(Sorry, didn't mean to embed it)

Lol, nevermind. I'm having trouble posting it because there is invisible encoding that I can't delete (Justin?)

Just search the term and watch from the site if you want more.

... I just skimmed through this, and I must say - I'm confused ... it seems that the position stated in this page is one wholly against capitalists and their poorly conceived technologies ("Today's riches are not human riches; they are riches for capitalism which correspond to a need to sell and stupefy. The products we manufacture, distribute, and administer are the material expressions of our alienation.") ... in fact, isn't the transition proposed here actually one of a radical change in mythos/ideology ("Of course, we must all be that 'Einstein', which is exactly what will unleash a creative energy sufficient to utterly refashion the conditions of human existence.") which will in-turn drive corresponding changes in the direction of science and technology (e.g., "Permaculture")?

So why all of the anti-science rhetoric? And why, if we can achieve a better "interim" world to live in via a radically new mythos/ideology that redirects science toward well-conceived lifeways and technologies, why do we in the end need to regress and throw away science as if it has some kind of demonic control over us? Isn't throwing away capitalism enough?

Aedes,

You say:

Which is very kind, but why? It's not going to happen. Humankind will continue to use science as a tool in the name of religion, nation state and capitalism - and humankind will become extinct as a result.

Look at them - the US and Russia about ready to nuke eachother into non-existence over 70,000 people who want thier own nation state on the basis of some scientifically dubious claim to an ethinic identity.

It's my honest opinion that employing science for scientifically valid reasons - to the end of securing human survival is a safeguard. It all works out - the ethics follow naturally in the course of doing the right thing in terms of valid knowledge.

But nobody gets it - it's too late.

iconoclast.

If you're resigned to the fact that we'll always misuse science, then why does it matter to you whether it's religion or economics or racism or whatever that motivates that misuse?

And I think survival of the species is 1) way too lofty a goal when we have much more immediate problems (that can always be directly dealt with keeping survival in the back of our minds), and 2) should not exclude all the other things we use science for in our lives. Scientifically speaking televisions have not done too much for our survival, but they ARE a major advance in applied science.

Maybe even done some harm...

There's nothing wrong with a little television. Comedy, the news. We could say the same about the internet but then we'd kinda be hypocrites.

Right - moderation is the key.

That said, television probably decreases attention span. This is pretty scary when you consider how many people watch 6+ hours of television every day. Better to read a book or the newspaper. Plenty of comedy and news from these sources.

It's crazy, my son can't tear his eyes from the TV whenever it's on, and he's only 4 months old. He's been doing this basically since birth. Scary. We're going to keep it really limited -- like tonight when we were watching an old episode of Reno 911 on Tivo while he was nursing. That's a good show for kids, right?

Ha! Reno 911 is a great show. The movie was... nicht so gut.

The symptoms your son shows I notice in myself sometimes. Very scary. I'm living at home again, but when I get back out I do not think I'm going to allow myself television. I'll keep a TV for movies and concert DVDs, but no more cable. It's just not good for you.

I recommend getting your son active in a sport asap. And teach him philosophy and the greek alphabet. lol. Time providing ofcourse.

lol, reno 911. 6 hours of tv doesn't seems to be the problem for my classmates anymore. Its 6 hours of MSN or facebook or myspace. That is much worse.

The boy is 4 months old. What sort of sport can he take part in? A sleeping competition? Parents nowadays try to impose too much structure on the lives of their kids. It's not good for them. To steal some George Carlin - what ever happened to sitting in the yard with a stick? Give them some freedom - lord knows when they grow up they wont get any.

As for philosophy - you don't want the kid to end up like JS Mill, having a mental breakdown in his early twenties. With well educated parents, like the child in question, I'm sure his education will be just fine.



You have a point there. No doubt. We forget how to communicate when we communicate electronically all of the time. Habitually losing your cell phone is a great habit to get into.

Aedes,

Perhaps you can understand my frustration - for you, my least vocal critic so to speak, don't get it either. You say human survival is: '1) way too lofty a goal.'

It's a non-contingent value - as close to an objective ethical value as might be concieved, and valuable for that reason. Science is value neutral - there's no reason inherent to science for example, to apply alternative energy technologies and not apply biological warfare - one needs a goal to direct application of scientific knowledge.

Upholding religion, economics or nationalism as values - because they are false to a scientific conception of reality, externalize aspects of the reality, and thus, possibilities for action. Further, because they are divisive, they introduce an intersubjective dynamic that does not allow for cooperation, but motivates the application of science to divisive interests and dreadful ends.

Thus where you say: '2) should not exclude all the other things we use science for in our lives.' It's only the survival of the species, the most objective and universal value, that doesn't exclude scientific possibilities - where religion, nation and capitalism do.

But I've tried to explain this over and over again, and not just on this forum but elsewhere, and no-one understands. I don't know why - and it's driving me to despair. (I have inner resources - I'll cope, but how long can I, should I keep doing this: :brickwall: ???)

Doesn't there come a point when it's just insane to continue - even when I know I'm right and the world is wrong and headed nowhere fast?

Ha ha ha, I remember thinking people would really get this, pick up on it and talk the new world into existence - if only I could explain it right. Then I conceded there may be some opposition from people with strong beliefs, but now, even someone like yourself, rational, intelligent, open-minded - it's like I can't get through.

What's the problem Aedes - be blunt, am I wrong? Am I not explaining myself adequately? Do you not understand what I'm getting at? Please - I wouldn't ask this of anyone else - but I trust you to be honest and fair.

iconoclast.

Part of what's happening here is that when any topic is raised folks interject their own Axe to Grind on it. Science (as a broad concept) has no "agenda", only the people who administer it. It's like a hammer, or 'fire', whether or not its results or motives are good, bad, productive, destructive, etc. have little to do with the tool and everything to do with whomever's wielding it.

I've really enjoyed this discussion thus far so I'd like to toss out some comments on the thread thus far, if I may:
[INDENT]

This is very insightful and I agree wholeheartedly. It hasn't a mind of its own, it is but a means by which humans seek knowledge and new methods.



This is one of my axes to grind. Mass media has brought so much empowerment in terms of Information, Education, Increasing Awareness yet destroys us by skewing our views, weakening our bodies, decimating our minds, implanting values and numbing the brain. Throw the baby out with the bathwater? No, not for me, but there's a real and present danger in vegging in front of the TV like so many do.



Ow! I re-read this entire post a few times and must be missing something. Survival of the species isn't something we can "deal with later". Destructive practices and trends must be dealt with as soon as humanity can motivate its lazy-ass into action. I'm hoping I've mistakenly taken this out of context.



*wild applause*



Yep; getting back to a theme many of us here have tried to interject: Science has brought much good and much bad. Toss out the means by which all this has come about and you toss much gold out (as well as its sand).



Yea, I hear ya. But for my part, it's not so much that it takes out all the fun, I feel its a broad form of quackery.

Though it may be properly legitimized in it's methodology, I cannot get passed the absurdity of the notion. In this, one person who's trapped and boxed-in inside their own minds with all their filters, views, bias, subconscious influences and blissfully unaware of all the quadrillion factors influencing human behavior can diagnose someone else. I simply believe that human behavior (its motivations, causes and influences) are far too complex to diagnose in this way. Yes, yes I know... there's been much success and much proof. The whole idea just strikes me as absurd... I'd rather been bled by leeches (at least then we'd have a better idea of what, exactly, the results of a session would be).

I share cupofcoffee's feelings on the destructive aspect of science (mental effects, capitalistic especially). For the longest time I too took up this battle-cry. I've realized over the last 20 or so years that it comes down to this: No one cares. We're on this roller coaster hootin' and hollerin' and lovin life. Play now, pay later! (didn't someone say something to the effect that we can deal with this by not addressing the issue, but by, "...keeping survival in the back of our minds").
[/INDENT]It almost appears that we have some measure of concensus that science has brought good and ill. If that be the case - to any extent - I'm wondering if we could re-direct back to the topic and ask: Is there anyway to moderate/direct scientific means? I don't think there is - the cat's out of the bag, the eggs have been broke and humpty-dumpty lays on the ground in a thousand pieces. Like everything else, humans will use any tool they can grab for their own purposes...

Thanks