"Science is bad and must be destroyed"

[marplots]

Having to deal a lot in the last few years on the internet forums, including this one, with the nonsense of postmodernist, cultural relativist and 'post colonial' studies which already conquered the Western Academia in Humanities (Islamic studies more exactly but the disease is much more widespread) I can easily recognize here the next step in the agenda: the all out assault on physical sciences. Even via this nonsense that the hard sciences, largely the product of Western civilization, are a way to continue the imperialist domination of 'the poors' (& their cultures) of the world.

While knowledge about the world around us may be agenda-free, the uses to which that knowledge is put, and the choices we make about which knowledge to pursue might not be. The point they are making isn't so much about science as a method, but how that method is applied to effect changes in the world. Certainly knowledge about nuclear weapons or bio-warfare falls squarely in that camp.

Where I live (in the US) we very much attempt to "own" knowledge. We say we have intellectual property rights. If you want the results of my scientific efforts, you must pay me. If you are too poor to pay, well, sucks to be you. If I can leverage my knowledge in a predatory fashion, I might. But the point is we are now directly in the territory of the humanities, morality and political policies. Cultural identity and values are part of this mix.

The conversation doesn't attack science so much as how humans use the tool to gain advantage over other humans.

 

[Craig B]

So, metacristi; unless you're permitted to vent your hostility towards Muslims, science will collapse. There's no good evidence for this, but you "can easily recognise the next step in this agenda" and "Relativism" (unqualified) "has zero justification".

That is not what Sokal states. His book (which is superb, by the way) is

concerned only with epistemic relativism, and not with moral or aesthetic relativism, which raise very different issues.​

 

[metacristi]

While knowledge about the world around us may be agenda-free, the uses to which that knowledge is put, and the choices we make about which knowledge to pursue might not be. The point they are making isn't so much about science as a method, but how that method is applied to effect changes in the world. Certainly knowledge about nuclear weapons or bio-warfare falls squarely in that camp.

Where I live (in the US) we very much attempt to "own" knowledge. We say we have intellectual property rights. If you want the results of my scientific efforts, you must pay me. If you are too poor to pay, well, sucks to be you. If I can leverage my knowledge in a predatory fashion, I might. But the point is we are now directly in the territory of the humanities, morality and political policies. Cultural identity and values are part of this mix.

The conversation doesn't attack science so much as how humans use the tool to gain advantage over other humans.

This may be a legitimate concern. Unfortunately it's not what those students advocate:

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/uni...-scrap-science-because-its-racist-oppressive/

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/20...le-cart-with-her-demand-that-ScienceMustFall1

 

[Dani]

While knowledge about the world around us may be agenda-free, the uses to which that knowledge is put, and the choices we make about which knowledge to pursue might not be. The point they are making isn't so much about science as a method, but how that method is applied to effect changes in the world. Certainly knowledge about nuclear weapons or bio-warfare falls squarely in that camp.

Where I live (in the US) we very much attempt to "own" knowledge. We say we have intellectual property rights. If you want the results of my scientific efforts, you must pay me. If you are too poor to pay, well, sucks to be you. If I can leverage my knowledge in a predatory fashion, I might. But the point is we are now directly in the territory of the humanities, morality and political policies. Cultural identity and values are part of this mix.

The conversation doesn't attack science so much as how humans use the tool to gain advantage over other humans.

You haven't seen the video from the OP, right? They clearly criticize the method as if it were indistinguishable from the results of applied sciences.

It's like criticizing grammar because it allows people to construct offensive language.