|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
A House Built on Sand
und über 1 Million weitere Bücher verfügbar für Amazon Kindle .
Erfahren Sie mehr
| ||||||||||||||||||||
Produktinformation
Möchten Sie die Produktinformationen aktualisieren oder Feedback zu den Produktabbildungen geben?
Ist der Verkauf dieses Produkts für Sie nicht akzeptabel? |
Produktbeschreibungen
From Library Journal
This book is the latest and most explosive bomb to be launched in the "science wars." Recently, a cadre of historians and philosophers of science have attempted to deconstruct the scientific process by examining its underlying social metaphors. Many scholars, especially practicing scientists, view these efforts with undisguised disdain. The essays here, which are by scientists and philosophers, debunk postmodernist science studies by exposing their purported biases, errors, and fallacies. Essentially, they deconstruct the deconstructionists. For example, Michael Ruse asks, "Is Darwinism Sexist?" while Alan Sokal tackles "What the Social Text Affair Does and Does Not Approve." Although some olive branches are extended, the overall tone is aggressive. Academics on both sides of the debate will need this book. Expect a counterattack.?Gregg Sapp, Univ. of Miami Lib., Coral Gables, FL
Copyright 1998 Reed Business Information, Inc. -- Dieser Text bezieht sich auf eine andere Ausgabe: Gebundene Ausgabe .
Copyright 1998 Reed Business Information, Inc. -- Dieser Text bezieht sich auf eine andere Ausgabe: Gebundene Ausgabe .
Pressestimmen
"This book is the latest and most explosive bomb to be launched in the 'science wars.'...Academics on both sides of the debate will need this book. Expect a counterattack."--Library Journal
"A thoughtful, wide-ranging, spirited, and highly informative collection. The sophisticated case for objectivity is fully developed in these expert pages."--Frederick Crews, author of The Memory Wars (1995) and editor of Unauthorized Freud: Doubters Confront a Legend (1998)
In diesem Buch
(Mehr dazu)
Einleitungssatz
The "House" in our title refers to interdisciplinary endeavors called Science, Technology, and Society Studies (STS) or Science and Culture Studies. Lesen Sie die erste Seite
Buchdeckel | Copyright | Inhaltsverzeichnis | Auszug | Stichwortverzeichnis | Rückseite
The "House" in our title refers to interdisciplinary endeavors called Science, Technology, and Society Studies (STS) or Science and Culture Studies. Lesen Sie die erste Seite
Mehr entdecken
Wortanzeiger
Ausgewählte Seiten ansehenWortanzeiger
Buchdeckel | Copyright | Inhaltsverzeichnis | Auszug | Stichwortverzeichnis | Rückseite
Tags(Was ist das?)Bei einem Tag handelt es sich um ein Schlagwort, das zum Produkt passt.
Tags erleichtern allen Kunden die Suche und die Sortierung ihrer Lieblingsprodukte. |
Kundenrezensionen
Die hilfreichsten Kundenrezensionen
Format:Gebundene Ausgabe
Another wonderful book in the so-called "science wars" which demonstrates that many of the critics of science, rationality, objectivity, etc. don't have a leg to stand on intellectually.
Format:Gebundene Ausgabe
A few months ago, I gave this book a mere three stars. Since then, I've used arguments made in the book several times. There are, alas, many people out there, especially among "Left" activists, who really do believe that, for example, we "Westerners" are all unrepentant bigots, that we have done nothing for the rest of the world except pursue our racist and imperialistic tendencies, and on and on. We do live in some pretty anti-scientific times, and that opens the door for New Age fairy tales especially among the better educated, those, again, of a social inclination who can't understand the "hard sciences," so we blame them for all our shortcomings.
I'd like to give the book five stars even if it might help sell just one. But, as I'm not a "hard scientist" myself, I can't claim to understand everything in the book, and I'll have to limit it to four.
Please, read it, though, and don't be surprised if it opens your eyes to the "arguments" people are using which are swiftly refuted in the book. At least acquaint yourself with the arguments, and use them to confront the Sandra Hardings and their ilk who really haven't a clue what they're talking about.
Format:Gebundene Ausgabe
I have a theory: That those of us with a social science inclination are intimidated by the specialized expertise required of the "hard" sciences. Consequently, we try to rival it with incomprehensible jargon, and findings with no evidentiary basis, of our own. We have, of course, our causes, racism, sexism, this-ism, that-ism. And, because we see hard scientists as our adversaries--because we don't understand what they're saying or how they reached their conclusions (and maybe because we envy them)--we accuse them of these sins.
This fine book is based on Alan Sokal's parody published by an allegedly scholarly social journal. Unfortunately for the journal's editors, they did not recognize it as a parody. In the parody, Sokal, a physicist, actually, heaven help us, quoted some of the post-modernists' "findings," that, for example, various conclusions of quantum mechanics--again, far beyond the comprehension of us social scientists--are based on white, male biases, and other nonsense of that ilk. The essays in the book were written by Sokal and other scientists citing particular post-modernists' work, and their dubious conclusions. They're good in describing, for example, the preconceived notions and false assumptions of the post-modernists, and how some "renowned" post-modernists' conclusions are not what they would have found had they followed their own logic. The essays, while eloquent, were written more for those who can understand the math used in the documents that the post-modernists trash.
There is a real talent in being able to translate difficult hard science math and conclusions into lay (non-scientist) terms. It has been done, and there are good magazines ("Astronomy" and "Scientific American" come to mind) that provide examples of it. While the book tries to do this, it can be a little dry for those of us without that hard science/math background. Fortunately, being dry and incomprehensible are not the same thing, so I understood what the authors were saying. And their refutation of the post-modernist balderdash is a blessing.
As to the post-modernists, as a veteran "leftist," I hear their balderdash all the time. Because of it, I've argued for years that the left is its own worst enemy. The (easily refutable) deductions of sexism and the like contribute to the "identity politics" which has limited my fellow progressives to shouting to each other.
I hope someone with the talent to which I already referred can better compile, or summarize the findings illustrated in this volume, so that maybe, just maybe, we can start being rational.
Möchten Sie weitere Rezensionen zu diesem Artikel anzeigen?
Waren diese Rezensionen hilfreich?
Wir wollen von Ihnen hören.
Kunden diskutieren
|
Das Forum zu diesem Produkt
Fragen stellen, Meinungen austauschen, Einblicke gewinnen Aktive Diskussionen in ähnlichen Foren
Kundendiskussionen durchsuchen
|
Ähnliche Foren
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lieblingslisten
Ähnliche Artikel finden
Anhand des Sachgebietes nach ähnlichen Produkten suchen:
Ihr Kommentar
Möchten Sie die Produktinformationen aktualisieren oder Feedback zu den Produktabbildungen geben?
|
