A new physics-oriented blog carnival, Philosophia Naturalis, has just appeared at Science and Reason. Here’s some background explanation. Looks like a great selection of articles.
To celebrate the birth of this new project, I’ll mention this quote from Al Franken, who is contemplating a Senate run in 2008:
There’s all kinds of things that need to be done. Respecting science again. I would like to do a law where no political appointee can change the language of a scientific report without getting the scientists who made the report to sign off on the language change. That’s a law I’d propose on the first day, I think.
Franken brought this up unprompted during an interview with Lindsay Beyerstein. It shows an admirably pro-natural-philosophy viewpoint.
In contrast, we have George W. Bush, who sees his foreign policy as part of a new religious rebirth:
“A lot of people in America see this as a confrontation between good and evil, including me,” Bush said during a 1 1/2 -hour Oval Office conversation on cultural changes and a battle with terrorists that he sees lasting decades. “There was a stark change between the culture of the ’50s and the ’60s — boom — and I think there’s change happening here,” he added. “It seems to me that there’s a Third Awakening.”
The First Great Awakening refers to a wave of Christian fervor in the American colonies from about 1730 to 1760, while the Second Great Awakening is generally believed to have occurred from 1800 to 1830.
Sadly, the one who views his actions through the lens of a titanic supernatural struggle is the President of the United States, while the one who faces up to the real world is a comedian. Draw your own conclusions about the decline of Western civilization.
The comedies and tragedies are mixed down to the deepest level on this side of the Atlantic. I think that it is appropriate that the most vocal political criticism about the Italian government and businesses come from a stand-up comedian. Here, he is named is Beppe Grillo. Some people have drawn parallels between him and Michael Moore. However, Grillo is much more ‘grass-roots’ than Moore, taking his criticism of the trashy methods with which the government and businesses conduct their work to communities all over Italy. Perhaps it was the only method left to him, after he was banned from national television in 1987. Whatever the reason, his grass-roots style has worked well; he uses the meetup.com community to bring people together in physical space for discussions (and for more stand-up comedy…). Cheer up, Sean. It could be a trend. The comedians might be taking over the world!
If Franken’s sentiment towards science is representative of mainstream comedy, then I’m all in favor of voting for comedians to hold public office. I’m speaking with honesty – no joke!
There is an old one that went something like this:
The world would not be in such a snarl
Had Marx been Groucho instead of Karl.
So it is good that comedians are in politics. Certainly we’ll be in less of a snarl because of that.
One of the articles at PN is a very nice review by Alejandro Satz about Price’s book on the arrow of time. Anyone want to comment on that? Dr Carroll?
(for Arun) “If Karl, instead of writing alot about capital, had made alot of it, it would have been much better.” –Karl Marx’s Mother
Another example: in my 4 years in the US, I have seen only one tv program that compares statements Rumsfeld & Cheney make with things they said a couple of years ago as the war was starting – I mean juxtaposing the videos side-by-side. It was the Daily Show…
The Daily Show. Home of unbiased in-depth news.
Don’t forget cheap shots.
Sean,
Please stop attacking the President of the United States of America for his religious beliefs. Show respect in your leader. It is one thing – and a very good thing – for you to occasionally question beliefs in mainstream physics. String theory notwithstanding, physics is supposed to be rigorous and a matter of facts, and not a matter for groupthink and dismissal of heretics simply for being critical. But politics and religion are the correct place for groupthink and nonsensical belief systems that have no factual evidence. If you attack Bush, you’re attacking the essence democracy itself, because he was elected TWICE, man!
Not at all. If you attack bush you are supporting the essence of democracy, which is dependant on criticism and transparency. If we don’t like the way someone in office thinks, it is our responsibility to say so, over and over and over and over, until the majority listens and kicks his ass out of office.
think about this, a few hundred years ago, the founding fathers where told “hey hey hey, whoa, this constitution doesn’t protect any rights or anything, it just establishes the governments responsibility and powers” and the founders where all like “come on, we all know that the government would NEVER do anything beyond the powers given to it by the constitution…” and the smarter ones where like “ummm… k’no, your stupid. We want our rights protected” so the founders got together and said to them self “alright, what are the top ten most important rights?” and number one was the freedom of speech, the right to protest, and that the government shall not establish religion.
Criticizing a religious fanatic in office = the most patriotic thing you can do.
next to actualy going to the ballot and voting him out of office yourself
The Man was elected to whitehouse.gov and you weren’t. Maybe Senator Franken will do better in politics than his radio show did. What State is he running in?
If you attack Bush, you’re attacking the essence democracy itself, because he was elected TWICE, man!
Great gonzos, where were all these defenders of presidential holiness during the Clinton years? Or when folks criticized FDR during WWII or Lincoln during the Civil War? Why is Bush’s administration above criticism?
Spatulated said it better than I could, but this is idea that either because of his position, his electoral victories or current events, no harsh words can be spoken of the president is complete and utter horse feathers. The president, no matter what his party or even what is going on in the country, is ever, ever above criticism. He is not the country, he works for the country. Big difference. A truly free society cannot function without open debate and discussion, and history has provided us with many examples of what happens when the leader of a country’s words and deeds have some sanctified bearing. It ain’t pretty.
And frankly, concerning Bush’s religious leanings, the damage his administration has done to the progress of science in the last six years leaves him wide open for criticism and denouncement.
Hmmm… not to undermine our President’s scholarship, but haven’t there already been three Great Awakenings? I’m just going on the word of Robert Fogel (Nobel Prize winning economic historian), who has for instance written the book The Fourth Great Awakening arguing that we’re currently in a new period of religious revival.
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/256626.html