Re: [asa] Fw: Message to Jennifer M. Granholm, Governor of Michigan

From: <drsyme@cablespeed.com>
Date: Mon Apr 07 2008 - 10:10:56 EDT

You dont listen, let me demonstrate.  How many times in this response are you showing your misunderstanding?

"This is exactly the attitude that exacerbates things. You have misunderstood my intention, Jack. I don't mind criticism, in fact, I welcome it. That is, if it can be conducted in a fair spirit, which is said to define this ASA list. "

I never said that you dont welcome criticism.  I was just saying that I was hoping the moderators would take my comments as an attempt at constructive criticism, and not as an attack on you.

"First, if you boot me, you boot sociology. There are no other sociologists here. Sociology of science may not be comfortable for scientists to listen to (and sometimes actually to hear), but it is a legitimate and recognized sub-discipline in the field of sociology. Science-friendly should be also sociology-friendly, which this list sometimes appears not to be."
 
I never mentioned booting you.  I was talking about the moderators booting me.  Michael Roberts got booted.  The only public post that I saw of his that might have cause that was a post directed towards you.  It was sarcastic, but if that is all there was I dont think the punishment fits the crime.  I suspect there was more to it.  But, I am concerned that I will be booted too, the list is being censored now.  But I never ever mentioned you being booted.
 
"Second, do you want me to post a list with a range of places, fields, disciplines in today's academy outside of natural sciences where 'evolutionary theory' is widely used? Would this convince you that 'evolution is not a specifically biological entity'?? "
 
This is the area yes that you could make some valuable contribution.  I dont know anything about evolution outside of biology, and frankly cant even conceive of it, in the same way that I understand biological evolution.   I dont see a mechanism for it.  But Gregory you need to understand this, and please listen.  This is a list about science and the bible, and most specifically about origins.  Biological evolution has something to say about what the bible has to say.  And even if evolutionary theory in these other disciplines might have something to say about the bible,  (and I dont think it has much to say), I would contend that the other disciplines say nothing at all about the interaction with science and the bible as far as origins go.
 
"Actually, Jack, now that you say it so clearly and precisely, this is EXACTLY the point I've been trying to make. Some people wish to insist, as you do, that "evolution is specifically a biological entity," while others are more in tune with contemporary academia on a broader context, to recognize that evolution is far bigger than merely biology. If you don't yet know this, please don't weigh in as an authority on the issue. It's similar in scope to saying that women can't be scientists! Stephen's post is actually disingenuous because it just asks a question to a question. And then it goes on to question whether sociology is actually a science. Now that I have answered him (mutations do not belong in human-social sciences), we'll see if he can contribute something positive. Can Stephen, as a biologist, admit there are some places that 'evolutionary theory' doesn't belong?"
 
I covered a lot of this in my last comment.  But why do you put in sentences like: "If you don't yet know this, please don't weigh in as an authority on the issue. It's similar in scope to saying that women can't be scientists!"  This is an example of the rhetoric without content that you use.  When did I ever say I was an authority?  And of course I never said anything about women and science, that is a cheap rhetorical trick that you use all the time, and it is inappropriate and doesnt at all belong in an intelligent dialogue.  You also took a cheap shot at Stephen implying that he has not contributed anything positive.  If you get booted, and I have not suggested that, it should be for things like that.
 
"Oh, yes, I am listening Jack, my ears, eyes and heart are open! Spell out my agenda more clearly than I have, please Jack. To defend sociology against the oppression of biology ('the biological challenge to social science,' 2006) is a clear mission!
 
My humility, Jack is easily recognized as coming from a 'smaller' discipline than biology. I just challenged the condescension of biology toward sociology (e.g. sociobiology and evolutionary psychology), and now am told that I condescend upon biology. This, I find mysteriously interesting! -) "
 
Well there you go.  You just spelled out your agenda.  You have come to a list that discusses science and the bible, specifically evolution and origins, to complain about the oppression of biology.  I honestly dont care about this battle you are fighting.  I am interested in the serious issues regarding origins.  And you might be able to, but so far you have not contributed to the origins discussion, because you have been focused on an agenda that many here are not as interested in as you are.  Take your rhetoric somewhere else.  You obviously are defensive about your discipline, but that did not come from the people on this list. 
 
You also obviously dont know the meaning of humility. 
 
"Warm regards, G."
 
This just sounds disingenous, there is nothing at all warm about anything you had to say.
 
 
 
 
 

 





 



To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message. Received on Mon Apr 7 10:12:49 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 07 2008 - 10:12:49 EDT