[lbo-talk] The struggle over science

[Victor]

MJ and CB
The negative effect of the mechanisation of production on intelligent 
practicality in general was recognized by A Smith, Ure, and other early 
classical political economists as well as by Marx (see Capital Part IV 
Chapter XIV sections 4,5 and Chapter XV sections 3 for starters).  Though 
these writers focussed largely on the decline of need for exercise of 
intelligent labour on the part of the "mechanized" working class, we can put 
two and two together, and conclude that the decline of practically 
intelligent working classes is not compensated by an increase in practical 
intelligence on the part of the bourgeoisie.  Business acumen, engineering 
skills, and even science practice are so much more functions of methods 
learned from others rather than of practical adaptation to actual 
confrontations with conditions in the field, that the incapacity of these 
professionals to cope with even some of the simplest of practical problems 
is proverbial.  We could also add to this observation that the progressive 
commodification of all aspects of life engenders a consumer population that 
while capable of operating complex machinery (like this computer) is ever 
less able to produce even the simplest tools for its own survival. I'm 
reminded of the "survivalist" fad of the late 80's and early 90's which was 
quickly transformed into a buying spree for the most sophisticated outdoor 
gear, weaponry, and so on.

Then there's an apocryphal tale about an ethnologist in New Guinea: His 
field kit aroused much wonder and interest among the locals, prompting them 
to ask if he could show them how he made the artefactual array at his 
service.  He went over everything he had, clothes, containers, cutting tools 
and so on and couldn't find a single item he could produce himself. 
Unfortunately I don't know how the normally self-sufficient tribesmen 
responded to this even greater wonder.
Victor

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charles Brown" <cbrown at michiganlegal.org>
To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 22:11
Subject: [lbo-talk] The struggle over science


> Miles Jackson
>
> CB: Past advances in natural science in the U.S. have been correlated with
>> U.S. politics getting dumber and dumber , no ?
>>
>>
>> ___________________________________
>
>
> This brings up a point that fascinates me: scientific progress doesn't
> demand a high level of intelligence or scientific acumen in the general
> population.  We just need enough scientifically minded and capable people 
> to
> do the science (which is just a small proportion of the total population).
> It's a strange tension: only a small proportion of the population knows 
> how
> a computer or a telephone or a television actually
> works, but everybody uses this technology in the U. S. every day.
> --Most of us are more or less "freeloaders" on the ingenuity and output of 
> a
> small number of scientists whose work we don't comprehend.
>
> On my crankier days, my response to the anti-evolution goofballs is:
> fine, if you don't like scientific research or reasoning as used to
> generate and verify the theory of evolution, stop using any technology
> derived from scientific procedures (i.e., just about all the common
> technology we use in industrial societies).
>
> Miles
>
> ^^^^
> CB: Yes, what I , sadly,wanted to point to here is the "Klingon" problem:
> The U.S. as high tech barbarians.
>
> I'm not really glad that the Bush admin is delaying scientific discovery.
> But it _is_ really a problem that a country with degenerate politics has
> scientific development that it misuses to build "worser and worser" W'sMD
> and other bad stuff, that it then uses to enforce its dumb politics on the
> rest of humanity.
>
> The problem Miles refers to is probably related. Science development is 
> not
> of , by and for the People, en masse. Would widespread scientific learning
> make U.S. politics better ? It certainly would expand atheism.
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>