Coronavirus
- This topic has 1,592 replies, 41 voices, and was last updated 10 months, 1 week ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Well I’d have to read it before making any sort of comment. The wiki entry does say this: ‘Some have seen the publication of Against Method as leading to Feyerabend’s isolation from the community of philosophers of science, who objected to his view that there is no such thing as the scientific method’.
Challenging indeed!
‘A community of philosophers’ is rather like the concept of ‘herding cats’. I had been reading a lot about the philosophy of science and then I came across Feyerabend and the subject changed for me entirely.
He may have attacked “science” but the following suggests that this was a bit of an intellectual pose. When it came down to it, he accepted its application:
“Less than two years after my meeting with Feyerabend, The New York Times reported that a brain tumor had killed the “anti-science philosopher.” I called Borrini in Zurich to offer my condolences. She was distraught. Paul had complained of headaches, and a few months later he was dead.
Recalling Feyerabend’s excoriation of the medical profession, I could not resist asking: Did he seek medical treatment for his tumor? Of course, she replied. He had had “total confidence” in his doctors’ diagnosis and was willing to accept any treatment they recommended; the tumor had simply been detected too late for anything to be done.”
(https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/was-philosopher-paul-feyerabend-really-science-s-worst-enemy/)He most definitely was not an ‘anti-science philosopher’ – talk about tabloid journalism. What he was against was all the hype and myth that surrounds science notably the idea that there is a universal ‘method’ that, like a magic spell, can be used to discover truth.
94% drop in symptomatic infections in vaccinated people
Wez wrote: “…the idea that there is a universal ‘method’ that, like a magic spell, can be used to discover truth.”
Without this myth, there is an opening for what Marx called ‘revolutionary science’, which is the democratisation of ‘science’.
‘Truth’ is not ‘discovered’, but ‘produced’. Socially. Historically.I don’t think scientists are involved or even interested in seeking an answer to Pilate’s question. That’s a pursuit of theologians and philosophers.
In any event, philosophers have nothing useful to say about the coronavirus vaccines and their efficacy. Whatever they say, they will all have the jab in the end. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Or rather the refutation of the pudding is.
I don’t think scientists are involved or even interested in seeking an answer to Pilate’s question. That’s a pursuit of theologians and philosophers.
In any event, philosophers have nothing useful to say about the coronavirus vaccines and their efficacy. Whatever they say, they will all have the jab in the end. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Or rather the refutation of the pudding is.
‘In any event, philosophers have nothing useful to say about the coronavirus vaccines and their efficacy.’
Would it be ‘true’ to say that, for you ALB, philosophers have nothing useful to say about anything?
Isn’t this thread about coronavirus?
If some speculative philosopher says that science is an ideology on a par with voodoo and religion with its own rituals and establishment then they are lending credibility to the views expressed by the presidents of Tanzania and Madagascar, the Chief Justice of South African and the Sri Lankan minister of health that there are other ways of dealing effectively with the current covid-19 pandemic than relying on the proved theories and practices of modern medicine.
Someone here expressed sympathy for this sophism and had to be called out.
‘Someone here expressed sympathy for this sophism and had to be called out.’
ALB – Blimey – I hope you don’t mean me! I’m simply calling for the same skepticism in this matter as we use in all of our analysis. ‘Science’ is not what most people think it is and contains a great deal of ‘speculation’.
Alan – preserve us from ‘common sense’ since this is usually just another word for ignorance.
MS – This debate is about ‘coronavirus’ and about the reason why many are distrustful of their governments and their experts when it comes to information about the virus. Governments have lied so often in the past that people are rightly very skeptical about what they are told. For us this is both a good and bad thing – good in that people are no longer prepared to swallow any propaganda that comes from their governments and bad in that it creates conspiracy theories that lead to movements like QAnon and anti-vaxxers etc.Alan – preserve us from ‘common sense’ since this is usually just another word for ignorance.
Wez, do you require it to be made a punishable offence not to wash your hands after going to the toilet? Or do you follow the medical experts’advice, to wash your hands, because even if you cannot see the germs and perhaps have never associated the ill-health consequences of not following the rules of hygiene, you still recognise the good sense of what you are being told and following the rule is at little cost to you personally.
Personally, i cannot understand those refuseniks when it comes to disregarding basic public health guidelines.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.