(urth) 5HC : Skinner, Turing
iorweththomas at hotmail.com
Fri Feb 4 06:56:41 PST 2005
>From: "Andy Robertson" <andywrobertson at clara.co.uk>
>We are chattering about science, and forgetting what is really important in
>understanding the human world (even the world of humans in books), which is
>The real emergent utility of Skinner's work - the way it was **used** in
>the real world - iwas to provide a shield of intellectual justification to
>those who want to reshape human behaviour through social engineering; which
>aim is, itself, merely a cloak over their own Inner Party desire for power.
Oh God, the justification of dubious politics by attatching the word
'scientific' to it. The same happened with Darwinism - Herbet Spencer and
the 'scientific' Social Darwinists. Yes, I can see why some would find it
useful. You'd be referring to certain Marxists, right?
It's probably not a coincidence that the conspiracy in Grant Morrison's
'Invisibles' sometimes slip into behaviourist-type rhetoric.
>I'm not sure Skinner was guilty of intending this end (I doubt it), but his
>work fitted perfectly into the environmentalist dogmas of his age, like the
>fraudulent "anthropology" of Margaret Mead and her mentor Franz Boaz.
One of the best critiques of environmentalist 'blank-slate' dogma, IMO, is
probably 'Beast and Man' by Mary Midgley, herself a left-wing moral
philosopher. But she's a virtue ethicist, and thus can't believe the 'blank
slate' stuff on pain of self contradiction.
>Wolfe sets his face like granite against this slavery, in book after book.
And rightly so. It's one of the few political views I share in common with
More information about the Urth