What's the viewpoint of anarchists and science, I seem a little confused here. From what I see that there's a large amount of males in science. Let's say that the way these institutions work only makes way for men, it's only a argument against hierarchy, o

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 1427400859715.jpg (81.79 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, shot0008.jpg)

Anon 03/26/15 (Thu) 20:14:19 120660 No.8322

What's the viewpoint of anarchists and science, I seem a little confused here. From what I see that there's a large amount of males in science. Let's say that the way these institutions work only makes way for men, it's only a argument against hierarchy, or at best social norms. This very well has nothing to do with scientific knowledge that has been produced in itself.

Obscurantism is a fairly common thing I see in most fields, including science(wilhelm reichs orgon energy seems pretty false to me). Most mainstream information produced by most of these fields is just obscurantist crap. However, to me, it seems like mainstream science isn't all that obscurantic at all. Thanks to Occam's razor and the scientific method.

Often I see anarchists go against mainstream versions of science. Is it because they merely fail to understand it?
I can assure you, scientists like Norman Borlaug have done tremendous good to humans(maybe not nature, could be debated).

I may be entirely wrong here about my observations, so feel free to correct me.

Anon 03/27/15 (Fri) 00:14:26 fd4c58 No.8323

File: 1427415266798.gif (620.04 KB, 400x430, 40:43, Relativity_of_Simultaneity….gif)

>there's a large amount of males in science

So the fuck what? Examine their theories, not their gender.

>Often I see anarchists go against mainstream versions of science.

Wtf are you talking about?

Anon 03/27/15 (Fri) 06:52:22 120660 No.8325

>>8323
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzrHwDOlTt8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kICLG4Zg8s

etc etc

Anon 03/27/15 (Fri) 15:09:42 120660 No.8326

>http://www.chomsky.info/articles/1995----02.htm

X is referred to as science here

> First category. X is dominated by "the white male gender." It is "limited by cultural, racial and gender biases," and "establishes and perpetuates social organization [with] hidden political, social and economic purposes." "The majority in the South has waited for the last four hundred years for compassionate humane uses of X," which is "outside and above the democratic process." X is "thoroughly embedded in capitalist colonialism," and doesn't "end racism or disrupt the patriarchy." X has been invoked by Soviet commissars to bring people to "embrace regimentation, murderous collectivization, and worse"; though no one mentions it, X has been used by Nazi ideologists for the same ends. X's dominance "has gone unchallenged." It has been "used to create new forms of control mediated through political and economic power." Ludicrous claims about X have been made by "state systems" which "used X for astoundingly destructive purposes…to create new forms of control mediated through political and economic power as it emerged in each system."

Conclusion: there is "something inherently wrong" with X. We must reject or transcend it, replacing it by something else; and we must instruct poor and suffering people to do so likewise. It follows that we must abandon literacy and the arts, which surely satisfy the conditions on X as well as science. More generally, we must take a vow of silence and induce the world's victims to do so likewise since language and its use typically have all these properties, facts too well-known to discuss.

I really don't like chomsky anymore

Anon 03/27/15 (Fri) 15:10:32 120660 No.8327

>>8326
I bet chomsky think that scientists should be fucked in the ass because the state made nuclear bombs too. Totally the fault of science and not that of the state.

Anon 03/27/15 (Fri) 16:56:34 ac0026 No.8328

>>8322
> This very well has nothing to do with scientific knowledge that has been produced in itself.

I don't think this is necessarily true. Now, for the core sciences, like physics chemistry and all the shit that don't have to do with human influence i agree with you. Once you start getting into things like psychology, sociology or anything that has to do with people examining people and you have only a small variation in the groups that examine these things (this being white and usually not poor men) then things can get all fucked up.

>Often I see anarchists go against mainstream versions of science

Really? You seen anarchists, collectively as a group, reject science? Im calling bullshit on that. You've at most seen a few individuals reject something specific, not the sciences a a whole.

>>8326
>I really don't like chomsky anymore
Congrats, you just learned Chomsky inst the infallible god of modern anarchism. Hes a human being with options that will differ from your own.

But because he said something that you obviously disagree with does that mean you should disregard whatever he says on various other topics? This very well has nothing to do with scientific knowledge that has been produced in itself.

Anon 03/27/15 (Fri) 17:24:27 ac0026 No.8329

>>8328
>This very well has nothing to do with scientific knowledge that has been produced in itself.

I have no idea why i put that there

Anon 03/27/15 (Fri) 19:37:59 13397b No.8330

File: 1427485078959.jpg (82.46 KB, 755x755, 1:1, 1423356351687.jpg)

>>8322

>Often I see anarchists go against mainstream versions of science. Is it because they merely fail to understand it?

I think the saddest thing about this is that OP in typical faggot fashion has gotten confused somehow about how the scientific method actually works.

Science is not incontrovertible. And it does not work by democracy. The way science works is one person has an idea. They find evidence to support it. Then other people consider the idea and the evidence and they either support that idea or they contradict it. Making arguments supported by evidence of various kinds.

Go back to YouTube and watch your neil de grass Tyson videos and keep pretending your head isn't all the way up your own fucking ass

Anon 03/27/15 (Fri) 19:55:49 015510 No.8331

>>8326
Have you even read what you linked?
He's criticising people who think science is shit because it's done by white nazi males, not suggesting that it's true.

Chomsky is clearly defending science there.

Anon 03/27/15 (Fri) 19:58:01 fd4c58 No.8332

File: 1427486281611.png (1.1 MB, 1280x685, 256:137, mpftqrmbtw1qbox0zo1_1280.png)

>>8330
"Our objective conjectural knowledge continues to exceed more and more what one person can master. Therefore there are no authorities." - Karl Fopper

Science divides itself into so many branches that it does work on a basis of accountability and transparency which is the aim of democracy, it's about being self-critical and testing assertions. Politics in general works on a trial and error method. Though science is definitely not democratic in the sense that whatever most people think qualifies for what becomes the rule.

Anon 03/28/15 (Sat) 06:23:06 120660 No.8344

I found the answer.>>8331

Anon 03/28/15 (Sat) 09:46:53 120660 No.8348

>>8330
>Go back to YouTube and watch your neil de grass Tyson videos and keep pretending your head isn't all the way up your own fucking ass
Exactly the kind of shit logic I would expect from someone anti-science

Anon 03/29/15 (Sun) 17:42:44 e39a06 No.8372

>>8327

but Nietzsche critic of science as the new god

Anon 03/29/15 (Sun) 19:41:49 56a643 No.8378

>>8326
Holy shit I have lost a lot of respect for Chomsky now :(

Anon SAGE! 03/29/15 (Sun) 21:28:19 fd4c58 No.8386

>>8372
>anarcho-blah

Why is that even a flag?

Anon 03/29/15 (Sun) 23:13:35 ff8864 No.8389

>>8348
Looooooooooooooooooooololololololololololplol ok lololololllllloll

Ifuckinglovescience = something to do with science

Anon 03/30/15 (Mon) 03:04:30 e39a06 No.8391

>>8386
if you want to get rid of queers make an alliance with capitalists. The manarchist bff

Anon 03/30/15 (Mon) 03:19:26 fd4c58 No.8392

File: 1427685566686.png (204.04 KB, 480x476, 120:119, 1425876429738.png)

>>8391
I could care less if you are a queer faggot, I just don't see the point in making a title around it, same goes for anfems. Identity politics are for liberal shits, not anarchists, we have more important shit to deal with.

>actually using the word manarchist

Kill yourself.

Anon 03/30/15 (Mon) 04:53:02 015510 No.8393

>>8378
Maybe try reading the article instead of judging him based on out-of-context quotes.