In his book "Science in a Free Society" P. Feyerabend states: "Today
science prevails not because of its comparative merits but because the
show has been rigged in its favour". Also, "the apostles of science
were the more determined conquerors" who "materially suppressed the
bearers of alternative cultures". Sounds realistic and yet the horror
story of George Orwell is much closer to the realities of the
situation:

"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and
you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make
that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it.
Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of
external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of
heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they
would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right.
For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the
force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the
past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind
itself is controllable what then?"

Pentcho Valev

Pentcho Valev wrote:
In his book "Science in a Free Society" P. Feyerabend states: "Today
science prevails not because of its comparative merits but because the
show has been rigged in its favour".

If he says so! I am always out for a good rigging providing it involves
logic and true interest in the Universe!

Also, "the apostles of science ....

I wonder who they might be? I mean, I know who the religious apostels
are and the televangelists and the hell and brimstone preachers. But
apostels of science???

...were the more determined conquerors" who "materially suppressed the
bearers of alternative cultures".

Scientists who suppress alternative cultures??? I am a little lost
here. So those hidious scientists form a culture and are threatening
which other culture???
Watch out for those terrorist scientist! What do they look like?

Sounds realistic and yet the horror
story of George Orwell is much closer to the realities of the
situation:

"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and
you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make
that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it.
Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of
external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of
heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they
would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right.
For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the
force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the
past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind
itself is controllable what then?"

You do realise that this description fits perfectly most modern
religious groups.

Ordog
"Beware of the man whose God is in the skies." Bernard Shaw

PS: I wonder what Orwell would have thought about the 21st century USA?

Ordog proudly stated:

Pentcho Valev wrote:
In his book "Science in a Free Society" P. Feyerabend states: "Today
science prevails not because of its comparative merits but because the
show has been rigged in its favour".

If he says so! I am always out for a good rigging providing it involves
logic and true interest in the Universe!

I usually like Feyerbend [simply because he nicely brings up the stink
everyone else doesn't claim to smell] so I wonder if this is out of
context. I wonder what fields science has been "rigged" to favor?
Supernatural explanations? Plato's ideals? The accountant or laywer's
view of natural history?

Pentcho Valev wrote:
In his book "Science in a Free Society" P. Feyerabend states: "Today
science prevails not because of its comparative merits but because the
show has been rigged in its favour".
[snip]

You know, I must not know the right people. Because I've been
a nuclear physicist for 15 years, and a science student for
10 years before that, and I've never been invited to one of
*those* parties where this rigging goes on.

It sounds like a hell of a lot of fun. If anybody *does* know
of such an event, I'd sure like an invite.
Socks

Is "The Party" working on a starship capable of 150c?

"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
oups.com...
In his book "Science in a Free Society" P. Feyerabend states: "Today
science prevails not because of its comparative merits but because the
show has been rigged in its favour". Also, "the apostles of science
were the more determined conquerors" who "materially suppressed the
bearers of alternative cultures". Sounds realistic and yet the horror
story of George Orwell is much closer to the realities of the
situation:

"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and
you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make
that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it.
Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of
external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of
heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they
would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right.
For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the
force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the
past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind
itself is controllable what then?"

The hypocrisy of using a computer and the internet to publish a luddite
screed is not lost on me.

--
Denis Loubet

http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com

Pentcho Valev wrote:
In his book "Science in a Free Society" P. Feyerabend states:


I have not read this book, thus I am confined to responding to the few
(probably out-of-context) words you quote here.

"Today
science prevails not because of its comparative merits but because the
show has been rigged in its favour".

If this is an honest example of his mental capabilities, then I feel
justified in never having read anything by that man. The stated claim
consists of a false dichotomy, of course: if "the show has been
rigged", then the immediate next question would be "who rigged it" and
in particular "WHY was it rigged". If we assert nothing more than a
profit motive on the part of the rigger/s, we immediately conclude that
"the show has been rigged in science's favor BECAUSE of its relative
merits".

It doesn't, of course, require a lot of rigging to realize that a $50
gadget on your roof prevents lightning from burning down your house --
a feat that tens of thousands of years of prayer and sacrifices failed
to achieve.

(Others have already commented on the rest of your post)


cordially


Y.T.

--
Remove YourClothes before you email me.

wrote in message oups.com...

Pentcho Valev wrote:
In his book "Science in a Free Society" P. Feyerabend states:


I have not read this book, thus I am confined to responding to the few
(probably out-of-context) words you quote here.

"Today
science prevails not because of its comparative merits but because the
show has been rigged in its favour".

If this is an honest example of his mental capabilities, then I feel
justified in never having read anything by that man.

This one has a small comment on this in section 2.14
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feyerabend/

Dirk Vdm



The stated claim
consists of a false dichotomy, of course: if "the show has been
rigged", then the immediate next question would be "who rigged it" and
in particular "WHY was it rigged". If we assert nothing more than a
profit motive on the part of the rigger/s, we immediately conclude that
"the show has been rigged in science's favor BECAUSE of its relative
merits".

It doesn't, of course, require a lot of rigging to realize that a $50
gadget on your roof prevents lightning from burning down your house --
a feat that tens of thousands of years of prayer and sacrifices failed
to achieve.

(Others have already commented on the rest of your post)


cordially


Y.T.

--
Remove YourClothes before you email me.

"Joseki" wrote in message oups.com...
Ordog proudly stated:

Pentcho Valev wrote:
In his book "Science in a Free Society" P. Feyerabend states: "Today
science prevails not because of its comparative merits but because the
show has been rigged in its favour".

If he says so! I am always out for a good rigging providing it involves
logic and true interest in the Universe!

I usually like Feyerbend [simply because he nicely brings up the stink
everyone else doesn't claim to smell] so I wonder if this is out of
context. I wonder what fields science has been "rigged" to favor?
Supernatural explanations? Plato's ideals? The accountant or laywer's
view of natural history?

Section 2.14 in
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feyerabend/

Dirk Vdm

science is one of the few fields where you can, if you have good ideas
get yourself published and become famous. A German patent clerk is a
good example of this. A. Einstein was rather looked down on by the
Junker establishment. He could not have done anything in politics. He
published a brilliant paper in 1905 which cleared up the Michaelson
Morley experiment, and another in 1915 which laid Leverrier's Vulcan to
rest and explained the orbit of Mercury.

These papers were read by scientists and jugded on their merits. Their
brilliance eventally led to a dazzling academic career. Every
prediction, with the exception of gravitational waves has been
experimentally verified.

That is not in any way due to the defects of the theory, it is due to
the defects of NASA and its ridiculous infatuation with the shuttle and
the space station. LISA will not be launced for a long time, but it is
certain to pick up gravitational waves when it is. Of course with
politics and manned space flight nobody will listen - the Junker
mentality.

Many scientific papers which are published are wrong. referees allow
publication when in doubt. Scientists themselves are expected to sort
out the wheat from the chaff.