Bill, thanks for this repost. Professor Hanaway's obituary reveals what an extraordinary man, scholar, and teacher he was - even for those of us who never knew of him. I envy you for having had even one class with him.
Your book review was thoughtful. The struggle, or at best the balance, between intuition and logic seems to be the best way forward in any inquiry. It seems like for most history, societies fail when they go fully into or the other end of the spectrum.
Loved this Bill. "Medawar sides with the conclusion of Bertrand Russell and Karl Popper that there is no scientific method. The myth of induction ...Medawar clearly rejects the idea that scientific discovery can be premeditated and cites the role of luck in scientific discovery. He carefully qualifies the role of luck by showing how the scientist places himself in a certain mindset amenable to luck through his studies and associations with other scientists." Exactly what Einstein thought. "Imagination is more important than knowledge" said Einstein on the biggest poster in my classroom. Day dreaming, being lost in the gaze, pausing and thinking rather than just consuming facts is vital. Einstein's poster was mocking the fact factory of schooling. I argue that the social sciences are not sciences at all, but always subjective social studies. Even science is subjective- what gets studied-what gets funded and how it is studied are all subjective. How we attend to the world is highly subjective.
I would say, Glen, that the processes surrounding science are subjective, in the ways that you outlined. But the actual testing of hypotheses conforms to standard rules. In other words, results must be both measureable and exactly repeatable. From the little I've studied, I think that some aspects of social sciences meet those criteria, while some may not.
One problem, Denise, with applying the hypothesis/observation/conclusion paradigm of the Natural Sciences to the hypotheses of Social Science is: How does one actually Test the hypotheses?
How does one go about determining what is the "best" ~ however defined by the Researcher ~ system of cultural, social, economic, and political organization, and especially, Real World execution for Human Beings?
Or is that what Human History is really all about?
Ie: The different ways that Humans have come up with to organize themselves ~ again, culturally, socially, economically, and [particularly and especially] politically ~ so as to increase their chances of, not merely surviving, but of "thriving," however then and there-defined.
WHAT gets studied and by whom is totally subjective, and very easily observed, Glen.. At least until it involves National or Corporatist Security.
But HOW it is studied ~ if it is to meet the criterion of being "scientific" ~ has some pretty well-established guidelines, standards, and protocols for meeting those standards. At least in the Natural Sciences.
And i personally believe that similar guidelines, standards, and protocols can be ~ and have been ~ established in the Social Sciences of History, Politics, Economics, and Mass Social and Societal Psychology.
I've known a lot of scientists in my life . None of them thought science could answer ultimate questions. Mostly they thought of science as something useful. When you're a student, science is something you participate in in order to help you later get employment. Later it becomes a way to organize your thoughts, usually to help you attain your goal with a minimum number of detours. What can I say? It works! Too bad more politicians aren't trained as scientists as opposed to, yuck, lawyers.
Maybe we're the ones who don't exist. There are those who claim we're a digital simulation like in The Matrix. Then it's all a recursive fairy tale. :-)
I do believe there could be advanced civilizations tho. out there in our Universe, and we've been announcing our presence since the early Twenties & Thirties. ie. radio communications so I'm sure if we get "Contact" they'll have much to teach us. Our Radio Telescopes are waiting just think of the Science they might have! Its a mind reeling thought, and I hope my childrens, childrens, children-- get to see it! Where is everybody?
Unfortunately, due to the vastness of space that's not really possible. Undoubtedly there's other life out there, they're just too far away to make contact with. And who really knows what kind of life evolved in the vastness of the universe.
Still you never know...Of course right now like the God question we must be courageous to keep pursuing the question, and even the next ques. Where does God come from then? And if it is ultimately unanswerable why not say the origin of the Universe is also unanswerable. If we say God has always existed why not save a step and conclude that the Universe has always existed....
Thank You, Doctor, Professor, and Lieutenant Colonel Astore, for sharing this.
It makes it very evident that ~ even 36 years ago in 1988 ~ You were well on the way to mastering the art, craft, and yes, what some might even call the “science,” of exploring and explaining exactly what You thought, believed, and felt about whatever came to Your attention.
And i’m curious: Did You ever follow-up on and respond to Professor Hannaway’s questions that he tacked on to Your review?
In any event, Your piece calls to mind a question i’ve been asking myself ever since i left Vietnam back in the Summer of 1968:
"Given what Humans know about the Universe, the Planet, Life, and Ourselves from our Natural and Social Sciences; and, Given what Humans can do in that Universe, to that Planet, with Life, and for Ourselves thru our Hard and Soft Technologies: Why, then, is there still Poverty, Hunger, and Disease, Illiteracy, Injustice, and Inequity, Ecocide, Genocide, and Democide, Insecurity, Tyranny, and War?
Jeff, I think this is one of the appeals of religion. I'll speak of Christianity, which posits sin as the source of all these crimes against humanity and God.
Sin is a useful category to explain why we transgress against our neighbor and ourselves, with winds like greed, hate, lust, gluttony, etc. being disobedient to God's teachings.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying sin is the source of our troubles or the explanation. But for many it helps to describe the problem and provides a way to avoid it.
Of course, there are other explanations and other ways to avoid crimes, injustices, etc. Melania Trump told us to "Be Best" and not to bully others, so why do so many follows the path of "Be Worst" while bullying and killing?
“Sin” ~ however defined [and by whom, where, and when] ~ is certainly a “useful category” for explaining why Some Humans do unto Other Humans as and what they do, Bill. But is it an actual explanation in itself?
Does it explain WHY Humans “sin”?
Does it explain WHY Humans kill, lie, steal, cheat, etc?
The Stoics suggested that Humans do things like that because they think that doing them is GOOD for them, and is thus the RIGHT thing to do.
One perspective is as follows:
The Best way folks can “Be Best” is to honor, respect, and, as able, preserve and protect the RIGHT of every other Human Being to Life, Liberty, Property, Privacy, The Pursuit of Happiness, and Truth,
If every Human Being did that simple thing, this Planet would be a much nicer place to live on, eh?
Of course, there is the Question of whether there are other Human “Rights,” as well. And the difference between Human Rights and Human Responsibilities, on the one hand, and Human Needs and Wants, on the other. But that’s a separate rant.
While science has allowed scientists to understand the reason things work as they do in the physical world, it has also established technologies that far exceed the capability of the planet to support.
Human desire is infinite. Technologies made possible by science opened the gates for our unlimited desire while all but eliminating nature's accompanying restraints (disease, starvation, etc.) Thus, in a very short time, (from the Industrial Age) and accelerating all the time, we are bringing our species, starting about 6 million years ago with our departure from our common ancestor with the chimpanzee, to a very rapid conclusion as shown by a graph of human population adding the most recent billion people in only 12 years (the first billion requiring millions of years).
While everyone has a brain only a tiny fraction of humanity understands science and technology, the vast majority of people knowing little to nothing about science or the mysteries it has solved and they don't care to know. The human mind, the wonder of the universe, is not employed to learn by humanity as a whole, but rather to pursue consumption with no limit, enjoying the fruits of technologies, consequences ignored.
Stewards for life on earth, few even know what stewardship is. Marvelously endowed with a reasoning ability gifted to us by evolution and an environment gifted to us by astronomical chance that we have not found duplicated anywhere else in the universe, we mindlessly rush for immediate pleasures. Our time is running out while lowly bacteria, possessing no mind, no science, will carry on as if we never existed.
Scientists tell us what we are doing. We ignore them, indulging desire. "The only rational animal", man, has used it to feed appetite beyond the point of gluttony, to have rather than to know.
Thank You, Bill. Maybe You can provide them both with instructions as to how to set up a Substack site together when they can rail and rant at each other, and leave the rest of us in Peace.
Bill, thanks for this repost. Professor Hanaway's obituary reveals what an extraordinary man, scholar, and teacher he was - even for those of us who never knew of him. I envy you for having had even one class with him.
Your book review was thoughtful. The struggle, or at best the balance, between intuition and logic seems to be the best way forward in any inquiry. It seems like for most history, societies fail when they go fully into or the other end of the spectrum.
Loved this Bill. "Medawar sides with the conclusion of Bertrand Russell and Karl Popper that there is no scientific method. The myth of induction ...Medawar clearly rejects the idea that scientific discovery can be premeditated and cites the role of luck in scientific discovery. He carefully qualifies the role of luck by showing how the scientist places himself in a certain mindset amenable to luck through his studies and associations with other scientists." Exactly what Einstein thought. "Imagination is more important than knowledge" said Einstein on the biggest poster in my classroom. Day dreaming, being lost in the gaze, pausing and thinking rather than just consuming facts is vital. Einstein's poster was mocking the fact factory of schooling. I argue that the social sciences are not sciences at all, but always subjective social studies. Even science is subjective- what gets studied-what gets funded and how it is studied are all subjective. How we attend to the world is highly subjective.
I would say, Glen, that the processes surrounding science are subjective, in the ways that you outlined. But the actual testing of hypotheses conforms to standard rules. In other words, results must be both measureable and exactly repeatable. From the little I've studied, I think that some aspects of social sciences meet those criteria, while some may not.
One problem, Denise, with applying the hypothesis/observation/conclusion paradigm of the Natural Sciences to the hypotheses of Social Science is: How does one actually Test the hypotheses?
How does one go about determining what is the "best" ~ however defined by the Researcher ~ system of cultural, social, economic, and political organization, and especially, Real World execution for Human Beings?
Or is that what Human History is really all about?
Ie: The different ways that Humans have come up with to organize themselves ~ again, culturally, socially, economically, and [particularly and especially] politically ~ so as to increase their chances of, not merely surviving, but of "thriving," however then and there-defined.
WHAT gets studied and by whom is totally subjective, and very easily observed, Glen.. At least until it involves National or Corporatist Security.
But HOW it is studied ~ if it is to meet the criterion of being "scientific" ~ has some pretty well-established guidelines, standards, and protocols for meeting those standards. At least in the Natural Sciences.
And i personally believe that similar guidelines, standards, and protocols can be ~ and have been ~ established in the Social Sciences of History, Politics, Economics, and Mass Social and Societal Psychology.
I've known a lot of scientists in my life . None of them thought science could answer ultimate questions. Mostly they thought of science as something useful. When you're a student, science is something you participate in in order to help you later get employment. Later it becomes a way to organize your thoughts, usually to help you attain your goal with a minimum number of detours. What can I say? It works! Too bad more politicians aren't trained as scientists as opposed to, yuck, lawyers.
There is no god. It's a fairy tale.
Maybe we're the ones who don't exist. There are those who claim we're a digital simulation like in The Matrix. Then it's all a recursive fairy tale. :-)
I do believe there could be advanced civilizations tho. out there in our Universe, and we've been announcing our presence since the early Twenties & Thirties. ie. radio communications so I'm sure if we get "Contact" they'll have much to teach us. Our Radio Telescopes are waiting just think of the Science they might have! Its a mind reeling thought, and I hope my childrens, childrens, children-- get to see it! Where is everybody?
Unfortunately, due to the vastness of space that's not really possible. Undoubtedly there's other life out there, they're just too far away to make contact with. And who really knows what kind of life evolved in the vastness of the universe.
Still you never know...Of course right now like the God question we must be courageous to keep pursuing the question, and even the next ques. Where does God come from then? And if it is ultimately unanswerable why not say the origin of the Universe is also unanswerable. If we say God has always existed why not save a step and conclude that the Universe has always existed....
Fact: There is no god.
There is no god.
That is better termed the "Agnostic" position.
Which "atheists" have ever posited that a "god" [or "gods"] ~ or "God[s[" or "GOD[S/s]" ~ exists. but just can't be proven to exist?
Thank You, Doctor, Professor, and Lieutenant Colonel Astore, for sharing this.
It makes it very evident that ~ even 36 years ago in 1988 ~ You were well on the way to mastering the art, craft, and yes, what some might even call the “science,” of exploring and explaining exactly what You thought, believed, and felt about whatever came to Your attention.
And i’m curious: Did You ever follow-up on and respond to Professor Hannaway’s questions that he tacked on to Your review?
In any event, Your piece calls to mind a question i’ve been asking myself ever since i left Vietnam back in the Summer of 1968:
"Given what Humans know about the Universe, the Planet, Life, and Ourselves from our Natural and Social Sciences; and, Given what Humans can do in that Universe, to that Planet, with Life, and for Ourselves thru our Hard and Soft Technologies: Why, then, is there still Poverty, Hunger, and Disease, Illiteracy, Injustice, and Inequity, Ecocide, Genocide, and Democide, Insecurity, Tyranny, and War?
Anybody here at BV got any thoughts on that?
Jeff, I think this is one of the appeals of religion. I'll speak of Christianity, which posits sin as the source of all these crimes against humanity and God.
Sin is a useful category to explain why we transgress against our neighbor and ourselves, with winds like greed, hate, lust, gluttony, etc. being disobedient to God's teachings.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying sin is the source of our troubles or the explanation. But for many it helps to describe the problem and provides a way to avoid it.
Of course, there are other explanations and other ways to avoid crimes, injustices, etc. Melania Trump told us to "Be Best" and not to bully others, so why do so many follows the path of "Be Worst" while bullying and killing?
I just woke up so forgive the typos! :-)
“Sin” ~ however defined [and by whom, where, and when] ~ is certainly a “useful category” for explaining why Some Humans do unto Other Humans as and what they do, Bill. But is it an actual explanation in itself?
Does it explain WHY Humans “sin”?
Does it explain WHY Humans kill, lie, steal, cheat, etc?
The Stoics suggested that Humans do things like that because they think that doing them is GOOD for them, and is thus the RIGHT thing to do.
One perspective is as follows:
The Best way folks can “Be Best” is to honor, respect, and, as able, preserve and protect the RIGHT of every other Human Being to Life, Liberty, Property, Privacy, The Pursuit of Happiness, and Truth,
If every Human Being did that simple thing, this Planet would be a much nicer place to live on, eh?
Of course, there is the Question of whether there are other Human “Rights,” as well. And the difference between Human Rights and Human Responsibilities, on the one hand, and Human Needs and Wants, on the other. But that’s a separate rant.
It's the devil, Jeff. If only he hadn't tempted Eve with that apple.
Then again, paradise strikes me as rather boring. :-)
We're imperfect creatures whose collective wisdom hasn't caught up with all our selfish appetites.
Heh. Yeah but...: Who and/or What created that Devil? And particularly: For what particular purpose?
And was Eve's act of taking that bite out of that Apple all part of The Plan? And if so, Whose or What's?
And what, exactly, is the ultimate purpose, intent, and goal of that Plan? If there actually is one.
Yes, it's all fascinating, isn't it?
I can answer your questions--but I'm not saying I believe the answers.
1. The devil is a fallen archangel, thus created by God.
2. God, I guess, allowed imperfection in His creation. That imperfection is manifested by Satan/Lucifer/Other Evil Names.
3. Why? I guess because God allowed for free will, allowed for choice, including "evil" choices.
4. I guess Eve's bite was part of Satan's plan to taint God's creation and to get God's creations to serve him instead of God.
5. Power seems the ultimate purpose, a contest of wills between light and darkness, God and Satan, with humans caught in the middle.
Sort of like Harris versus Trump with us stuck in the middle. I'll let you decide which is God and which is Satan. :-)
Spoiler alert: God wins in the end, but not without a lot of collateral damage.
Heh. Whether or not it's "fascinating" depends, i suspect. on how one defines "fascinating."
In any event and if i may ask: What are the answers to those questions that You DO believe?
While science has allowed scientists to understand the reason things work as they do in the physical world, it has also established technologies that far exceed the capability of the planet to support.
Human desire is infinite. Technologies made possible by science opened the gates for our unlimited desire while all but eliminating nature's accompanying restraints (disease, starvation, etc.) Thus, in a very short time, (from the Industrial Age) and accelerating all the time, we are bringing our species, starting about 6 million years ago with our departure from our common ancestor with the chimpanzee, to a very rapid conclusion as shown by a graph of human population adding the most recent billion people in only 12 years (the first billion requiring millions of years).
While everyone has a brain only a tiny fraction of humanity understands science and technology, the vast majority of people knowing little to nothing about science or the mysteries it has solved and they don't care to know. The human mind, the wonder of the universe, is not employed to learn by humanity as a whole, but rather to pursue consumption with no limit, enjoying the fruits of technologies, consequences ignored.
Stewards for life on earth, few even know what stewardship is. Marvelously endowed with a reasoning ability gifted to us by evolution and an environment gifted to us by astronomical chance that we have not found duplicated anywhere else in the universe, we mindlessly rush for immediate pleasures. Our time is running out while lowly bacteria, possessing no mind, no science, will carry on as if we never existed.
Scientists tell us what we are doing. We ignore them, indulging desire. "The only rational animal", man, has used it to feed appetite beyond the point of gluttony, to have rather than to know.
You are both trying my patience. Last warning to you both. Stay on subject and stop attacking each other or I will suspend you both.
My site doesn't exist for petty bickering and personal attacks.
Thank You, Bill. Maybe You can provide them both with instructions as to how to set up a Substack site together when they can rail and rant at each other, and leave the rest of us in Peace.