The Seduction of Objectifying Understanding (the cult of science)

09 Feb The Seduction of Objectifying Understanding (the cult of science)

I’ve been getting lovely feedback from readers since the publication of my book, The Overweight Brain: How our obsession with knowing keeps us from getting smart enough to make a better world. You might remember it from this site, where I published chapters as I wrote them and invited reader comments. (Thank you so much if you read and commented!) Friends and colleagues tell me how much they love the book and also what people they’ve recommended it to are saying to them (so far, all good). What’s especially gratifying is being told about study groups and collective readings taking place in different cities in the US and elsewhere. And did I mention that translations into Spanish Chines and Japanese are in the works?

Of course, I’m very happy about the buzz, the activity and the positive feedback. Sales on Amazon are good, even though I wish for four times as many!

I’ve gotten requests to lead Overweight Brainwebinars and have a few lined up during the next several months. The one I’m inviting you to is sponsored by the East Side Institute (my home base). It will take place on Sunday March 24, 2-3 pm EST and it’s free (click here to register).

A colleague told me that a group she’s in recently read Chapter 7, “The Cult(ure) of Science and its Possible Demise.” I think it’s great that they did. But I was disappointed that (as she related the group’s discussion to me) there was no mention of something I thought worth lively discussion (both what I wrote and its implications). Since I would really like this to get some attention—questioning, dialogue, feedback (“Wow!” “You’re kidding, aren’t you?” “No way!” or even a “Ho-hum, so what?”), I reprint it here for you.

If we accept (for the moment) the objective-subjective distinction and apply it to itself, don’t we expose that science’s claim to objectivity is subjective? Isn’t it a statement, proposition, opinion, belief, etc., about science as a way of knowing? If so, how can it be objective? Within the dualistic framework of objective-subjective, this kind of aboutnessbelongs to the mind (the “inside”) and not to the material world (what’s “out there”). In this regard, it’s important to note that scientists don’t only claim that what they study, the things “out there” in the material world, like rocks, stars, human organs and systems, are objective. They also claim that how they study these things and come to understand them is objective. Yet, by their own classification, studying and understanding something belongs in the subjective category.

And that’s not all. Science doesn’t present itself as merely one way of knowing, but rather as the highest form of knowing, superior to all others. Why? Because it’s objective! This claim, too, is subjective—it’s a statement aboutscience—and a value judgment, to boot. (pp. 132-3)

Come to the free webinar on March 24 and say something about this. Or write me.