Yes, this “false science” is epistemologically inseparable from the interests of capital. Science is used to assert this specific epistemology at the expense of all others. Too often we consider science to be a list of facts that have been produced instead of a methodology that is grounded in epistemology.
My issue is that Science™ is not the truth, and there is not one science, there never was. If we accept capital dominates us epistemologically then we accept the truth of class struggle, sure, but to say that science is organized around capitalism actually drinks some of the kool-aid that is being challenged here. It suggests we can merely separate “science” from capitalism for the win. Wrong. How would it even be science™ anymore? There are many under recognized sciences that already do this by virtue of not being the supremacist epistemology of the enlightenment, and by virtue of how robust and tried they are, but we are too busy trying to rescue an epistemology that has been distilled by capital for centuries to recognize the extent of the harm that has been done or the futures we are foreclosing.
I just can’t see the problem as simple as capitalists don’t like the Truth™ so they just ignore it. Rather it is an entire process that begins with researchers and their own processes and ethics which are formally grounded in accumulation of knowledge (and thus profit). THIS is the enlightenment showing. The enlightenment is an assertion of intellectual and epistemological supremacy over the world and over all of history.
The lie of enlightenment is in its name. There is nothing enlightening about claiming victory over the ancients or taking up epistemological supremacy. The enlightenment did not invent science, it is the result of centuries of philosophical discourse and material development making the incredibly stupid statement that they have THE way to create knowledge and the ONLY way to understand HOW they know it’s the only way to create knowledge. And of course, this method–dissection-- is an embarrassing epistemology to claim supremacy for when it literally can’t understand anything in relationship with anything else. Likewise, our boy Hickle (i love his work) separates science from capitalism erroneously and somewhat sanctimoniously, and it produces a limited understanding of both.
Capital is not guilty of wrongthink, it is guilty of shaping “truth” undemocratically and without proper recognition of the living world. I don’t think we need to save science™ from capital. I think Id rather venture to reject the enlightenment broadly instead and open up to different epistemologies and approach questions more pluralistically and reflexively.
Yes, this “false science” is epistemologically inseparable from the interests of capital. Science is used to assert this specific epistemology at the expense of all others. Too often we consider science to be a list of facts that have been produced instead of a methodology that is grounded in epistemology.
My issue is that Science™ is not the truth, and there is not one science, there never was. If we accept capital dominates us epistemologically then we accept the truth of class struggle, sure, but to say that science is organized around capitalism actually drinks some of the kool-aid that is being challenged here. It suggests we can merely separate “science” from capitalism for the win. Wrong. How would it even be science™ anymore? There are many under recognized sciences that already do this by virtue of not being the supremacist epistemology of the enlightenment, and by virtue of how robust and tried they are, but we are too busy trying to rescue an epistemology that has been distilled by capital for centuries to recognize the extent of the harm that has been done or the futures we are foreclosing.
I just can’t see the problem as simple as capitalists don’t like the Truth™ so they just ignore it. Rather it is an entire process that begins with researchers and their own processes and ethics which are formally grounded in accumulation of knowledge (and thus profit). THIS is the enlightenment showing. The enlightenment is an assertion of intellectual and epistemological supremacy over the world and over all of history.
The lie of enlightenment is in its name. There is nothing enlightening about claiming victory over the ancients or taking up epistemological supremacy. The enlightenment did not invent science, it is the result of centuries of philosophical discourse and material development making the incredibly stupid statement that they have THE way to create knowledge and the ONLY way to understand HOW they know it’s the only way to create knowledge. And of course, this method–dissection-- is an embarrassing epistemology to claim supremacy for when it literally can’t understand anything in relationship with anything else. Likewise, our boy Hickle (i love his work) separates science from capitalism erroneously and somewhat sanctimoniously, and it produces a limited understanding of both.
Capital is not guilty of wrongthink, it is guilty of shaping “truth” undemocratically and without proper recognition of the living world. I don’t think we need to save science™ from capital. I think Id rather venture to reject the enlightenment broadly instead and open up to different epistemologies and approach questions more pluralistically and reflexively.