SOROS' ENLIGHTENMENT FALLACY VERSUS MINE

See the post below from 2013.

 

I would add that Soros' distinction, for purposes of his concept of The Enlightenment Fallacy, between natural phenonena and human affairs, is erroneous.

 

My concept of an Enlightenment Fallacy is fully as applicable to the study of natural phenomena as to human affairs, since for certain purposes, the study of natural phenomena and human affairs are both prone to similar Enlightenment related weaknesses. This fact has revealed itself in spades in recent discussions of global warming, creationism, fake facts, fake news, etc.

Take a look also at books and lectures on the history of science as well. See for example The Teaching Company course entitled "Science Wars". That is rather good. "It touches some themes I have broached here, re terms search: compartmentalization, junk science, experts, multi disciplinary issues, disciplinary foundations, politics, philosophy of social science, Wittgenstein, metaphysics, history of science, ethics, religion, sophistry, and anti intellectualism."

Another trend which I have noted here in the past has been the cooptation of university science, as well as liberal arts, faculties by those whose agenda is dictated either by new more aggressive anti intellectual, or more aggressive market dominated, programs, or both.


Sunday, July 27, 2014

RE 1984

" I know it is the fashion to say that most of recorded history is lies anyway. I am willing to believe that history is for the most part inaccurate and biased, but what is peculiar to our own age is the abandonment of the idea that history COULD be truthfully written. In the past people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously coloured what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that 'facts' existed and were more or less discoverable. And in practice there was always a considerable body of fact which would have been agreed to by almost everyone. If you look up the history of the last war in, for instance, the ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA, you will find that a respectable amount of the material is drawn from German sources. A British and a German historian would disagree deeply on many things, even on fundamentals, but there would still be that body of, as it were, neutral fact on which neither would seriously challenge the other. It is just this common basis of agreement, with its implication that human beings are all one species of animal, that totalitarianism destroys. Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as 'the truth' exists. There is, for instance, no such thing as 'Science'. There is only 'German Science', 'Jewish Science', etc. The implied objective of this line of thought is a nightmare world in which the Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but THE PAST. If the Leader says of such and such an event, 'It never happened'--well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five--well, two and two are five. This prospect frightens me much more than bombs--and after our experiences of the last few years that is not a frivolous statement." 1984 DK excerpt

Unfortunately, a war, even, won't get one automatically toward objective facts or truth. The old adage history was written by victors has some truth to it.  According to Orwell's reasoning, the last thing he would have said, were Hitler to have won, was that this German history was thus now historical truth.

Re scientific truth, as an objective standard, Stephen Goldman had some good lectures on the history of science, and its controversies,  within the context of European intellectual, mostly physical science and astronomy: "Science Wars", Teaching Company.

Re philosophy of social science, Winch had some useful essays, in Ethics and Action, struggling with problems of truth, method, and morality, through historical, scientific, and social transformation, what I would call, in one sense, a struggle for neutral scientific, and moral, explanations, across disciplines, academic and political factions, wars, civilizations even, and time, etc.,: "Man and Society In Hobbes And Rousseau", "Nature And Convention", "Witchcraft And Magic Among The Azande", "Understanding A Primitive Society",  etc., etc. Winch, of course, read and spoke both German and French; things which I, unfortunately, did  not.

Wikipedia: philosophy of social science, Peter Winch

 

"Saturday, June 8, 2013

See A kindred spirit

David Kaiser's post, some time ago, re Soros, etc.

This was my favorite quote from Soros (in Kaiser's post):

 "Popper’s hidden assumption that freedom of speech and thought will produce a better understanding of reality is valid only for the study of natural phenomena. Extending it to human affairs is part of what I have called the 'Enlightenment fallacy.'"

A great insight. Commenting on Kaiser's current post, one might also call it the Free Press Fallacy, or even, say, The Drew Pearson Fallacy.

I would just call it The Karl Popper Fallacy, and let people wonder how far I mean to go on that.

I would add, to the elements of Soros' Enlightenment Fallacy, a faith in free, open, Smithian, (and eventually global), markets.

Yet, this addition sets me off from Soros and his, otherwise, and in other contexts, quite globalist tendencies.

Most liberals are not nationalists, deep down, but rather anti nationalist globalists, nowadays. It was not always so.

Let's put it this way, the Nazis gave nationalism an unnecessarily ugly rap.
(The Bolshevics somehow avoided this type of bad rap, largely because of the gross ignorance and naivete of Western regimes, and their conservatives, and their liberals.)

I would just advert, momentarily, to a great small book by Butterfield, in the enlightenment context, The Whig Interpretation Of History. (Maybe I'm just stuck, Tory like, on Regius Professors of History, or just stuck on Regius anything.)

In a similar vein, the ideas of the Founding Fathers, as Bailyn has pointed out, owed more to radical Protestantism, and the common law, (one could also add commercial self interests, including, preponderantly, smuggling, tax evasion, and slavery) than to enlightenment ideas per se.

Term search, if so inclined eg: Popper, Lorch"