The Last Propagandist

By -
As I've mentioned elsewhere, the popular history of science is often pretty bad. However, I believe I've located the worst work of popular science ever written: Michael White's Isaac Newton: The Last Sorcerer. A entirely typical error: White writes that Descartes "did not contrive experiments to support his [scientific] theories." Luckily for me, I have been reading Descartes' Philosophy of Science by Desmond Clarke at the same time as White's book. Clarke notes that, in 1628, Descartes gave up metaphysical writing because, as "the correspondence suggests," "the burden of experimental work precluded any other writing" (emphasis mine). He returned to metaphysics in 1634. In other words, for six years, Descartes basically did no work except experiments. And he performed experiments at many other times in his life as well.

Doh!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more