05/28/2008

Not an occasion for hatin' on postmodernists

Some of the ScienceBloggers have picked up on a story about a teacher who threatened, via email, to sue her (freshman comp!) students for harassment. It's quite obvious that the woman was simply litigious -- she also tried to sue her superiors because they "ignored" the harassment -- and couldn't handle her students' challenging her. (I wish more students would disagree with and challenge me in class.) Unfortunately, this one case of a teacher's thin-skinned childishness is being used in the science blogosphere to attack postmodernism in general, which I think is unfortunate and reflects a continued misunderstanding of the term and philosophies it encompasses. Sure, some postmodernists will argue that science is just one "way of knowing," but their aim is to question beliefs that we accept as "natural" because of religious and social norms, not to present a drippy New Age form of relativism. The scientific method is in my view the most effective and safest "way of knowing" in the medical field; people who sell magic water make me angry too. But the ways in which many scientists and proponents of the "new" atheism on the blogosphere praise Enlightenment seems to me philosophically problematic: while the "scientifically study the natural, reject the supernatural" aspect of it makes sense, the (implied) "only (certain privileged) humans can shed light on what's been kept in the dark" aspect can be somewhat unsettling. Historically, there's a little bit of colonialism buried in Enlightenment, a factor that should be acknowledged. Basically, just because there are perhaps more than a handful of New-Agey relativists out there who call themselves postmodernists doesn't mean that postmodernism runs counter to science.

04/10/2008

Secular Jewish site

JBooks.com has a page on secular culture worth checking out. The site includes articles written from both new-school-atheist humanist and older-generation Marxist points of view. For me, the humanist/Enlightenment side's a bit problematic as usual. See, for example, a rewrite of Echad Mi Yodea -- "Who Knows One?":

"Q. Who knows One? A. One? I know One. One is the Flame of Enlightenment, which gives light for people all over the world."
Which implies, though not overtly and most likely not intentionally, that those who developed philosophical enlightenment are the ones able to "give light" to "people all over the world." Therein lies the problem with the current wave of atheist thinking, I suppose. Smart in its complete rejection of the supernatural, but philosophically problematic. But it's helpful in any case to offer young Jewish people ways of seeing their culture without the involvement of the supernatural.