| Why Science has an ideology A Quick defintion of the ldeology of Science - It's the fundamentally unprovable assertion that life and the universe are an accident or pointless and are the result of blind,inanimate forces.Science would argue that it's not an ideology it's just through empirical resdearch the universe has presented itself that way in every discipline of science. I noticed in the last decade of the last century a tendency of the more high brow media to view Science as is if was behaving like a Religion. Programmes like the 'Heretic' series dealt with successful scientists ostracised for their research into the paranomral. I remember another memorable example was a Radio 4 interview with Richard Dawkins, a prominent spokesman for Science being accused of the same intolerance and absolute certainty of beliefs that he attributes to Religion. This 'zealous intolerance' is nothing new however and there is a pile of literature which shows throughout history, that erstwhile successful scientists have been ostracised, ridiculed, reduced to poverty or have commmited suicide all because they've investigated subjects which the ideology of Science has decreed as impossible, or to be more specific anything that looks like it may have a link, however tenuous, with Religion. That Science should have such violent feelings towards religion is totally understandable for it emerged in world dominated by an oppressive, corrupt all powerful church.So it is not surprising that it should want to stomp out any chance of it making any kind of comeback.That statement may explain where science got it's ideology from, but does not explain why a century or so on Science still fiercely holds an unprovable assertion in it's heart.The answer which only occurred to me apparently recently is that it does so for a purely practical reason. Science is now the dominant ideological, philosophical force in society we are predominantly secular because of it.The breadth of its influence is all encompassing. It shapes and controls the whole agenda of ideas and thoughts of society, from the practical problems of everyday life to the ultimate fate of the universe. Because of Science's obvious technological and medical successes the majority of people have accepted it's bleak ideology. However, the ironic point is that these successes are not dependant upon this ideology.....No. Science clings to this ideology because it serves a political purpose and that is.to keep the status quo which would be disrupted by a resurgance of religion. Although some individual outspoken scientists may attack religion from a philosophical, ideological perspective, the fundamental drive for the Scientific establishment is practical and political. And I use the word politics in the governmental Political Party sense, because I see that Science and religion besides having their obvious declared function have an undeclared key socio-political role in the infrastructure of society. We can easily accept a socio-political view of Religion particularly in the Western past. But I know a lot of people will find it hard it accept that about Science now, because of those amazing technological developments that have changed the face of this world.and because we have been endlessly told that Science is based on empiricism and fact. I know some people will be having exactly this problem right now and for that reason please read this next short article. |
| Meet the New Boss.Same as the old Boss It seems an odd thing to say, but to me Science now and Religion in the western past are basically the same.They both occupy the same function in society and are used to legitmise the prevailing status quo. Religion was used to legitimise Royalty,the Divine right of kings.To justify wars and to give us an explanation of the universe and our place in it and of course a moral code. Science legitimises Businness, the new power in the land via Darwinism (The free market=Survival of the Fittest).It may not be used to justify war but it is entangled with the military. Of course it gives us an explanation of the universe and our place in it. It is however without a moral code and still relies on code of behaviour that has it's roots in religion. However, it can inform the social and moral behaviour that we have through socio-biology and genetics. They both have another thing in common, they both don't play it straight.The extremely powerful role they play in the infrastructure of society means they are fundamentally tied into the stabilty of that society and that means knowledge and what direction it seems to point to, becomes dangerous and therefore must be controlled. So it is no accident that Science is unbending and intolerant, just like religion it's predecessor was.It is simply the exercise of control over that knowledge.The reality is, is that knowledge is not neat and tidy.The knowledge that we already have has many interpretations and there are pieces of information that don't seem to fit at all, and of course, there's always new information to come. If some of this sounds familiar -The desire to control information in order to present a united front -The unbendingness -Two powerful group ideologically opposed to each other.If it reminds you of the behaviour of political parties, well that is exactly the point of this whole article. Science's control of information serves the same purpose it does for a political party, it provides a consenus view, which in society equals power. How Science goes about the practical business of contolling the flow of information is the subject of the next article .Contiued on the next page. |
| Here are a trilogy of short articles analysing Sciences attitude to the paranormal from a sociological position |
| Why Science has an ideology, |
| Meet the new boss, same as the old boss |
| Science needs macho men (Continued on next page) |
 |
 |
| The Modern Paranormalist |