[lbo-talk] Conversation with Derrida

Andy andy274 at gmail.com
Thu Nov 5 12:02:53 PST 2009


On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:


> There's a venerable tradition of serious
> criticism of instrumental reason and the capitalist corruption of science
> and technology. Just because Stanley Aronowitz is an idiot doesn't mean
> there isn't a good way to go about criticizing the orthodox scientist's view
> of the world.

All I know of Sokal is on his website (in English) and I'm not sure if this addresses what you're talking about, but he doesn't seem to think science above examination from a social perspective:

(BTW, what's between him and Judith Butler?)

<http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/afterword_v1a/afterword_v1a_singlefile.html>

[....]

For example, Harding (citing Forman 1987) points out that American research in the 1940s and 50s on quantum electronics was motivated in large part by potential military applications. True enough. Now, quantum mechanics made possible solid-state physics, which in turn made possible quantum electronics (e.g. the transistor), which made possible nearly all of modern technology (e.g. the computer).8 And the computer has had applications that are beneficial to society (e.g. in allowing the postmodern cultural critic to produce her articles more efficiently) as well as applications that are harmful (e.g. in allowing the U.S. military to kill human beings more efficiently). This raises a host of social and individual ethical questions: Ought society to forbid (or discourage) certain applications of computers? Forbid (or discourage) research on computers per se? Forbid (or discourage) research on quantum electronics? On solid-state physics? On quantum mechanics? And likewise for individual scientists and technologists. (Clearly, an affirmative answer to these questions becomes harder to justify as one goes down the list; but I do not want to declare any of these questions a priori illegitimate.) Likewise, sociological questions arise, for example: To what extent is our (true) knowledge of computer science, quantum electronics, solid-state physics and quantum mechanics -- and our lack of knowledge about other scientific subjects, e.g. the global climate -- a result of public-policy choices favoring militarism? To what extent have the erroneous theories (if any) in computer science, quantum electronics, solid-state physics and quantum mechanics been the result (in whole or in part) of social, economic, political, cultural and ideological factors, in particular the culture of militarism?9 These are all serious questions, which deserve careful investigation adhering to the highest standards of scientific and historical evidence.

[....]

-- Andy



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list