It is unfortunate that since Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions science as a cultural phenomenon—what I’ve been referring to as “scientism” and “TheScience™”—has doubled down on the notion that science can be a settled thing, that ultimately, scientific models are the phenomena instead of useful and productive heuristics doing their best to account for the appearances, to make predictions, and to engineer useful technologies. One would have expected that following Koestler, Kuhn, Judson, McGilchrist and those science historians who have added to the project of debunking science myths, the public (and especially those in government) would enjoy a more sober view of science as a deeply troubled sociological and anthropological activity. What I’m calling a “sober view” is, after all, the one we arrive at when tu…
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to analogy to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.