<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>ragesoss &#187; John Horgan</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ragesoss.com/blog/category/john-horgan/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ragesoss.com/blog</link>
	<description>assorted blogging by Sage Ross</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 21:08:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
<cloud domain='ragesoss.com' port='80' path='/blog/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />
		<item>
		<title>&quot;The End of Science&quot;?</title>
		<link>http://ragesoss.com/blog/2006/09/24/the-end-of-science/</link>
		<comments>http://ragesoss.com/blog/2006/09/24/the-end-of-science/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Sep 2006 02:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sage</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[John Horgan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[limits of science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[neuroscience]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[philosophy of science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ragesoss.com/blog/?p=51</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Final Frontier, by John Horgan This article caught my fancy. Despite a few caricatures of the &#8220;postmodern&#8221; perspective used to avoid all that troublesome analysis by people who spend their career&#8217;s studying how science works (a misreading of Kuhn, followed by &#8220;But the postmodern stance is clearly wrong&#8221;, accomplishes this nicely), and the always [...]
Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://ragesoss.com/blog/2007/11/07/the-end-of-the-history-of-science/' rel='bookmark' title='The End of the History of Science?'>The End of the History of Science?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://ragesoss.com/blog/2006/07/29/science-and-the-long-tail/' rel='bookmark' title='Science and the Long Tail'>Science and the Long Tail</a></li>
<li><a href='http://ragesoss.com/blog/2008/04/20/the-paranoid-style-in-american-science/' rel='bookmark' title='The Paranoid Style in American Science'>The Paranoid Style in American Science</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.discover.com/issues/oct-06/cover/">The Final Frontier, by John Horgan</a></p>
<p>This article caught my fancy.  Despite a few caricatures of the &#8220;postmodern&#8221; perspective used to avoid all that troublesome analysis by people who spend their career&#8217;s studying how science works (a misreading of Kuhn, followed by &#8220;<span id="article_text"><span>But the postmodern stance is clearly wrong&#8221;, accomplishes this nicely), and the always  problematic move of a categorical distinction between pure and applied science, Horgan has a keen eye for the big picture of modern science and its place in the trajectory of history.</p>
<p>Actually, from a Kuhnian perspective, the &#8220;end of science&#8221; phenomenon is something that demands explanation.  Although the current pantheon of mid-level and high-level paradigms has not been around for that long in years, many current theories have survived the scrutiny of many more man-years and research dollars than their predecessors.  Much of it comes down to a question Horgan alludes to in the article: To what extent is the universe set up in ways we can understand it?  As Horgan points out, it takes a measure of faith to believe that the universe is ultimately rational and comprehensible.  Up through the middle of the 20th century, scientific progress seemed to justify that faith; deciphering the genetic code and establishing the central dogma of molecular biology are prime examples pointing toward a fundamental unity of knowledge.  But contingency has been replacing unity as the theme of scientific progress: increasingly complex (and seemingly arbitrary) theories in physics; increasingly specific and non-universal discoveries in biology and chemistry.  The issue of whether we can expect and hope for another round of over-arching theoretical breakthoughs is very tied up in the ideologies of science.</p>
<p>Case in point: Horgan&#8217;s discussion of neuroscience was paralleled in the <a href="http://www.yale.edu/terrylecture/thisyear.html">Terry Lecture panel discussion</a>.  Plantinga (the philosopher) expressed the same sort of scepticism about a materialist explanation for consciousness that Horgan does, and seemingly for the same reasons (though perhaps with a theological component as well).  Krauss and Miller were fully and unreservedly confident that consciousness <span style="font-style: italic;">will </span>eventually be reduced to matter and motion, so to speak.</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Horgan_%28American_journalist%29">John Horgan</a>, a science journalist who sometimes calls himself &#8220;The Scientific Curmudgeon&#8221; (an enviable title), also has a blog: <a href="http://discovermagazine.typepad.com/horganism/">Horganism</a>.<br /></span></span></p>
<p>Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://ragesoss.com/blog/2007/11/07/the-end-of-the-history-of-science/' rel='bookmark' title='The End of the History of Science?'>The End of the History of Science?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://ragesoss.com/blog/2006/07/29/science-and-the-long-tail/' rel='bookmark' title='Science and the Long Tail'>Science and the Long Tail</a></li>
<li><a href='http://ragesoss.com/blog/2008/04/20/the-paranoid-style-in-american-science/' rel='bookmark' title='The Paranoid Style in American Science'>The Paranoid Style in American Science</a></li>
</ol></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://ragesoss.com/blog/2006/09/24/the-end-of-science/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

