My pet peeve, Science is everything

Ed Fowler said:
Critics play an important roll in the science and art of knife making, they point out failures in communicating, and future knowledge to be sought. While some critics are laughable, others contribute significantly.
Click to expand...


Ed, yes critics can play an important role. However, far too often they try to impose their own biases and standards onto their subjects. Knife makers as critics of knife makers often just say, the subject should try and be more like they are. In order to be an effective critic they really need to research their subjects so they can understand what the intent of the artist/maker was etc... and judge them by their own standards. In other words,… how successful was the subject in achieving his/her own personal goals? On the internet anyone can pretend to be a critic, even if they haven't done their homework. That's when it becomes ludicrous…

When the critics don’t live up to their own standards, they become hypocrites.

Critics can play an important role, but self criticism is really the most important… It’s the most valuable skill an artist/craftsperson can learn.
 
Last edited:
... If the bottom line critique from another knife maker is just, … "You should do like I do, and/or you should try and be like me",... Just filter it out (unless you want to be like them).

… I’m mean, if that’s all they’ve got? LOL
 
Tai Goo said:
Ed, yes critics can play an important role. However, far too often they try to impose their own biases and standards onto their subjects. Knife makers as critics of knife makers often just say, the subject should try and be more like they are.
Click to expand...

Holy glass houses Batman! :eek:

Roger
 
RogerP said:
Holy glass houses Batman! :eek:

Roger
Click to expand...

Well put Robin!

... Don't try and be like me. Be true to yourself! Be your own best and worst critic. :)

AND, never trust/believe your reviews either way....

ZOWIE, ZONK, KABOOM and KABAM!
 
Last edited:
Tai Goo said:
It's the blind faith in science I have a problem with.
Click to expand...

Science must be repeatable and held up to scrutiny, and therefore there is NO SUCH THING as "blind faith in science".

Science is the only knowledge/discovery system that is self-correcting. That's what makes it science.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcOQduHEv08

MONSTER MASH
(Bobby "Boris" Pickett)
source: http://www.lyricsondemand.com/



I was working in the lab late one night
When my eyes beheld an eerie sight
For my monster from his slab began to rise
And suddenly to my surprise


He did the mash
He did the monster mash
The monster mash
It was a graveyard smash
He did the mash
It caught on in a flash
He did the mash
He did the monster mash


From my laboratory in the castle east
To the master bedroom where the vampires feast
The ghouls all came from their humble abodes
To get a jolt from my electrodes


They did the mash
They did the monster mash
The monster mash
It was a graveyard smash
They did the mash
It caught on in a flash
They did the mash
They did the monster mash


The zombies were having fun
The party had just begun
The guests included Wolf Man
Dracula and his son


The scene was rockin', all were digging the sounds
Igor on chains, backed by his baying hounds
The coffin-bangers were about to arrive
With their vocal group, "The Crypt-Kicker Five"


They played the mash
They played the monster mash
The monster mash
It was a graveyard smash
They played the mash
It caught on in a flash
They played the mash
They played the monster mash


Out from his coffin, Drac's voice did ring
Seems he was troubled by just one thing
He opened the lid and shook his fist
And said, "Whatever happened to my Transylvania twist?"


It's now the mash
It's now the monster mash
The monster mash
And it's a graveyard smash
It's now the mash
It's caught on in a flash
It's now the mash
It's now the monster mash


Now everything's cool, Drac's a part of the band
And my monster mash is the hit of the land
For you, the living, this mash was meant too
When you get to my door, tell them Boris sent you


Then you can mash
Then you can monster mash
The monster mash
And do my graveyard smash
Then you can mash
You'll catch on in a flash
Then you can mash
Then you can monster mash
 
Last edited:
Los Angeles said:
Science must be repeatable and held up to scrutiny, and therefore there is NO SUCH THING as "blind faith in science".

Science is the only knowledge/discovery system that is self-correcting. That's what makes it science.
Click to expand...

It is the source of relevant scrutiny that is most difficult to achieve, many are lead astray by those least knowledgeable, sometimes great insight can come from the mouth of of a child.
 
Last edited:
I had the flu a couple of days and read Hemmingways' For "Whom the Bell Tolls" for the second time. This time I had the benefit of over 60 years life experience and 100's of authors and instructors on a wide range of subjects. I found his insight into social and personal psychology of man to have much greater insight than I found in the first reading. From the "Classics" to the authors of today there is little new in these realms.

Prometheus, Darwin, Shakespeare, Thoreau, Ayn Rand, Van Gogh, Robert Henri and many others had one thing in common, a dream conceived through their personal experience. Each continues through their own fans and each knew their own skeptics. Time and circumstance separates the wheat from the chaff.

It is the transparency of some skeptics that give strength to the individual who must often stand alone.
 
Last edited:
Here's a good quote from the middle link above:
http://www.tc.umn.edu/~allch001/papers/pseudo.pdf

"Characteristically, textbooks of science contain just a bit of history,
either in an introductory chapter or, more often, in scattered references
to the great heroes of an earlier age. From such references
both students and professionals come to feel like participants in
a long-standing historical tradition. Yet the textbook-derived tradition
in which scientists come to sense their participation is one
that, in fact, never existed."

–Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
 
Good thought Tai: It is up to the individual student to find the perfidy. Sometimes it comes through the introduction from an author who never read the text that follows.
 
The amazing thing is how little those that seem to be hyping science really know and/or understand about science itself... or just don't want to know. So,... they perpetuate, propagate and follow the myths… blind faith, like any other.

... Largely due to the pseudohistory of science, which has a very ugly face...
http://www.geekologie.com/2008/08/04/joker-3.jpg
 
Last edited:
Rather than seek to understand the basic variables, they modify significant variables to suit their personal bias then condemn the theory to obsolescence due to their personal errors of understanding and therefore inept experimentation. Naturally they seek to verify their observations with obscure sources of knowledge.
 
Tai Goo said:
This is not a new idea, but…

It could be that what we perceive as “objective reality” (or physical reality) or objective truth is really just a very good illusion, like a dream. If so, it could explain the success of science working within the framework of this illusion. However, if the “truth” lies beyond objective reality, science will eventually hit a dead end and fall short.

Spiritual reality may in fact prove to supersede physical reality in the end.

The human race is still in it's infancy... we hope.
Click to expand...


"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." Albert Einstein

I’m no fan of the shotgun wedding of science and mysticism proposed by books like The Tao of Physics. But this guy http://www.sol.com.au/kor/11_01.htm seems to be speculating about issues similar to your proposal.
 
Without the greater academic community, scholarship, arts and humanities and society in general, science is just a dog without a leash… or so it would be.
 
Last edited:
If I understand the direction of this thread recently (having read the article Tai posted the link to in #170), the implication seems to be that some who espouse science as the be-all and end-all as a result of its inherent methods overlook the fact that much scientific gain is achieved through means that don't fit the "scientific method". The fact that many of science's greatest triumphs are achieved by accident or through inspiration (e.g. artistic means) as opposed to deductive reasoning is trivialized or dismissed altogether.

By neglecting those alternate means to achieving advancement, we limit the potential for future advancement. By redefining history to support one's beliefs about science as the ultimate arbiter of truth and fantasy, we become students of a different form of fantasy that ultimately deprives us of an appreciation for the truth.

- Greg
 
There may not be “A” Truth or "The" Truth, but rather many truths that on the surface apparently oppose and/or contradict each other,… but somehow, magically and miraculously come together through art, science, scholarship ect., for creative purposes by creative means... This is NOT "science". It's “humanity“... the very best of who we are and all we can be.

Each of us individually and collectively have the potential for true genius,... if we only believed.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top