In our age there is no such thing as 'keeping out of politics.' All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.
George Orwell
Nature has become a political space, in this sense any natural phenomenon that we witness has a political dimension. (compare the hurricanes Katrina and Sandy for instance or the various flu pandemics) Since our capacity to react/prevent is much greater than before dealing with the aftermath of any natural catastrophe is a political business. Moreover all science and research are understood as criteria of strength for states competing on the global market. Science is a political business. Press and its so easily assumed liberty are political businesses.
Thinking independently from the political or from the social is just a big oxymoron. Thought processes are natural phenomena; but their nature is political. What it's even more intriguing is the pathology of the politics: mythomania for instance is a disorder for anyone except the politician. Because for them, it must be mentioned among special skills on the CV. Of course that it might sound harsh for the sensitive ears of a natural scientist to admit the dominance of the political over any other department of our life today, especially because researchers prefer to focus on their work and passion for scientific work. It's a choice; is it a correct one? It depends on the timing. Dante Alighieri - 'The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.'
What I've exposed above is the fact that the content of the human thought has nothing to do with the natural sciences, such as biology. The thinking mechanism or how the brain functions can be explained by various sciences focusing on particular aspects. There is always a difference between a tool (brain) and its various functions and the actual outcome, the product of thinking, the thought.
Natural sciences tend to occupy a space of neutrality or objectivity in comparison with social sciences that always embrace a more or less obvious political colour. Reducing all knowledge to natural sciences (there are some tendencies of this kind) amounts to an attempt to falsely de-politicise the omnipresent political space. To ignore the social facts and creep into empiricism and pretended neutrality.
Certainly politics does weigh heavily in scientific choices (for example, whether or not to link one's research to another discipline for some reason) as the big money seems to be "being squatted upon" by the materialists.
The fact that these so-called "scientific choices or decisions" do NOT entail getting on with the actual research itself makes me question whether they are "scientific".
And yes, it's rough-going for those in the social sciences and the humanities.
Do you think there is more writing being done by the materialistic scientists on mind workings than by those in the humanities?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology
- Cognitive Science