Dear Billy, Here you go https://karthiknavayan.wordpress.com/about/
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, 8:52 am Billy Rojas, <1billyro...@buglephilosophy.com> wrote: > Dr. Navayan: > > I am gratified that you regard my comments about objectivity and > subjectivity > > useful. Of course, feel free to make use of the material on your blog. > > > May I ask the name of your blog? I'm curious and would like to visit your > site. > > > sincerely > > Billy Rojas > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------------ > *From:* Dr.B. Karthik Navayan <nava...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, March 8, 2018 10:21 AM > *To:* RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com > *Cc:* Centroids; Billy Rojas > *Subject:* Re: [RC] Re: Objectivity [ RC ] Is Science a Social Construct? > > Billy Rojas, > I liked this explanation of subjectivity. Can I post it to my blog? With > your name. > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, 11:43 pm Billy Rojas, <1billyro...@buglephilosophy.com> > wrote: > >> *Ernie:* >> >> There isn't just one correct way to define "objectivity." However, there >> is >> >> no point in getting tangled up in knots over the issue. Essentially my >> viewpoint >> >> is that of the philosophical Pragmatists like James and Peirce. >> >> >> Objectivity is what makes medical science possible, that allows for a >> procedure >> >> like open heart surgery to be successful, that permits experts to predict >> the weather >> >> or (albeit with only a few seconds warning with current technology) >> earthquakes >> >> in places with lots of monitoring, that allows for architects to design >> great bridges >> >> that span hundreds of feet of water and not fall down, and so forth for a >> wide >> >> variety of areas of interest from economics to hydraulics to psychology >> >> to molecular engineering. >> >> >> We can be approximately as successful as scientists about such matters >> >> to the extent that we use scientific method or something similar. So far >> >> there still are mistakes in many areas but what is remarkable is how >> >> far we have progressed since, say, 1750. >> >> >> Objectivity should also mean willingness to value subjectivity in all >> cases >> >> where personal feelings, intuitions, inclinations, values, etc are in play >> >> which do not conflict with legitimate use of the scientific method. >> >> >> That is, to refer to the crux of things, not for one minute do I >> disregard the >> >> worth and reality of the spiritual realm; and this is subjective in many >> senses. >> >> However, not for one minute do I disregard the approach of the sciences >> >> to religion, either. Religion is both a phenomenon amenable to scientific >> >> scrutiny and an epiphenomenon which is its own domain. As such this >> >> manifestly does not mean that religion is the focus of an ever shrinking >> >> set of phenomena, everything else having given up its secrets to >> >> microscopes and telescopes. Rather, the real task is to try and >> >> understand the relationships of everything that goes by the term >> >> "religious" and to be open to something that might be characterized >> >> as communication from a life-affirming unseen source. >> >> >> To me this also says that we are far better off using the standard >> vocabulary >> >> of "objective" and "subjective." I may well adopt a neologism now and >> >> then but whatever a new word may turn out to be, it should not >> >> muddy the waters. >> >> >> >> This said, there is far better language available to talk about >> >> religion -aka spirituality- than with antiseptic terms and abstractions. >> >> Give me a classic poem by Dryden any day, or heartfelt searching by >> >> Albert Schweitzer or, of course, Proverbs in the Bible, or Ecclesiastes, >> >> or the Gospels, or for that matter, the Dhammapada. >> >> >> >> Billy >> >> >> >> -------------------------------- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Centroids <drer...@radicalcentrism.org> >> *Sent:* Thursday, March 8, 2018 9:00 AM >> *To:* RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com >> *Cc:* Billy Rojas >> *Subject:* Objectivity Re: [RC] Fwd: [FoRK] Science Wars: Is Science a >> Social Construct?, Women's Studies as Virus >> >> I sympathize. I think part of the problem though might be the word >> “objectivity.” How do you define it? >> >> For myself, I’ve been toying with the weaker phrase “trans-subjective” to >> affirm that there is more to reality that mere subjectivity, without having >> to defend a claim to objectivity. >> >> E >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Mar 7, 2018, at 08:12, Billy Rojas <1billyro...@buglephilosophy.com> >> wrote: >> >> The weakness of current critiques of objectivity, said to be impossible >> anyway, >> >> is that where this gets us is to that place where, in the 1920s, >> >> Weimar Germany was getting, a breakdown in credibiliity >> >> in just about all "family values." This opens the door wide >> >> to nihilisim, to anything goes libertarianism, and, hence >> >> to virulent strains of populism. >> >> >> Mind you, I am pro-populist, but this refers to the 1890s version >> >> of populism, not to the authoritarian forms that have arisen since. >> >> It is the authoritarian forms that all-too-easily slide over into >> >> full fledged hard Right and hard Left authoritarianisms. >> >> >> Finally, I define RC in large part as research centered. >> >> This refers to the scientific method, or as much of that method >> >> as we can make use of in ordinary prose. For me this means >> >> that objectivity, as much objectivity as possible, >> >> is the necessary foundation of Radical Centrism. >> >> -- >> -- >> Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community < >> RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> >> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism >> Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to radicalcentrism+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to radicalcentrism+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
