Science Wars: Politics, Gender, and Race

by Anthony Walsh

Few issues cause academics to disagree more than gender and race, especially when topics are addressed in terms of biological differences. To conduct research in these areas or comment favorably on research can subject one to scorn. When these topics are addressed, they generally take the form of philosophical debates. Anthony Walsh focuses upon such debates and supporting research. He divides parties into biologists and social constructionists, arguing that biologists remain focused on laboratory work, while constructionists are acutely aware of the impact of biologists in contested territories. Science Wars introduces the ideas motivating the parties and examines social constructionism and its issues with science. He explores arguments over conceptual tools scientists love and constructionists abhor, and he provides a solid discussion of the co-evolution of genes and culture. Walsh then focuses his attention on gender, how constructionists view it, and the neuroscience explanation of gender differences. Moving to race, Walsh looks at how some have tried to bury the concept of race, while others emphasize it. He considers definitions of race―essentialist, taxonomic, population, and lineage―as they have evolved from the time of the Enlightenment to the present. And finally, he attempts to bring the opposing sides together by pointing out what each can bring to a meaningful discussion.

Genres: Science, Philosophy, Psychology, Nonfiction, Genetics

210 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2013

Reviews

[Emil O. W. Kirkegaard]

Useful hbd book but too much philosophy

[Rinstinkt]

[notes are in Albanian]

"Science Wars" nga Anthony Walsh merret me trajtimin e disa çështjeve të ndërldihrua... duke filluar nga pikëpamjet filozofike dhe intuitat e lindura kah metodave shkencore, dhe mëpastaj kalon në trajtimin e temave më specifike (si diferencat mes sekseve/gjinive dhe racace) ku manifestohet kjo çarje midis këtyre dy pikëpamjeve.

Teza e autorit - dhe faktet në favor janë dominuese - është se ekzistojnë dy kampe: së pari ata që drejtohen nga realiteti biologjik de provat që ky ofron dhe faktet që ne arrijmë të nxjerrim përmes metodës shkencore, dhe kampi tjetër me konstruktivisëtës social që i refuzojnë shpjegimet dhe shpesh edhe faktet biologjike dhe në të kundërt i vënë theksin kulturës dhe ideologjisë, aq sa në disa raste marrin edhe trajtën e karikaturave.

Libri fokusohet kryesisht tek debatet dhe argumentet rreth seksit/gjinisë dhe dallimeve racore, ku autori ofron një historik të shkurtër, përmend disa emra kyç që kanë qenë pjesë e këtyre debateve, dhe pastaj përmend faktet shkencore mbi të cilat idealisht duhet të ndërtojmë pikëpamjet që kemi mbi këto apo edhe të tjera tematika.

-

Key books/works mentioned:
- A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles
- The Two Cultures
- What's Wrong with Sociology?
- Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science
- Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science
- A Darwinian Left: Politics, Evolution, and Cooperation
- The Social Construction of What? (To Read List)
- The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature
- Fear of Knowledge: Against Relativism and Constructivism (To Read List)
- Francis Bacon - Novum Organum
- The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

[Steven]

Paradoxically, this book is 160 pages of the famous Richard Feynman quote that "Philosophy of Science is as useful to scientists as Ornithology is to birds" while also asserting otherwise. It's strange, and I'm not even sure what's trying to be done.

Philosophical and religious underpinnings exist and impinge upon these issues for each camp on every issue, but ... what? I don't get how what's said negates the metaphysical, epistemological, and ethical outlooks all going off in various directions. Does understanding negate differences or something? Kuhn and others show how this project can't work.

The author also skips over how all of the ideas he opposes were imposed hamfistedly upon societies by governments. Boaz was a spy. Mead was all over the government despite being a "rube" as disinformation agents will assure you (the Mead hoax-hoax). Israel Ehrenberg was an anthropologist from the UK with a fake name who was inexplicably taken seriously and promoted by extremely popular shows (e.g. Johnny Carson)(count the red flags in his life). According to Alan Dershowitz: Gould was chummy with Jeffrey Epstein. As was Gardner by his own admission. In addition to being buddies with the "adaptive paedomorphism" enthusiast Gould, Richard "real behavior genetics has never been tried" Lewontin was buddies with Severn Suzuki's dad.... the US also backed post modernism, which is why its universities are full of it. The connections and documentation are endless.

I just don't get why academics can't acknowledge the existence of states and their heavily documented histories of culture creation.