3 ms·

The professor's words still stand independent from whatever website decided to feature them.

by Zee2 9y ago

danharaj 9y ago
Paper: http://catalystjournal.org/ojs/index.php/catalyst/article/view/122/pdf_3 http://catalystjournal.org/ojs/index.php/catalyst/article/vi... Abstract: In this paper, I argue that those of us who have left the Sciences proper and moved to feminist studies spaces have continued to do science through our teaching. In a moment when the impulse to do real science is palpitating in our feminist hearts, I suggest that we critically examine the political stakes of our affective attachments and detachments from s/Science(s). I consider what it means to be attached to a Science that earned its epistemic authority through its co-constitution with colonization and slavery. I argue that passion for science may act to strengthen the relationship between Science and Truth and conversely, willful refusal and failure may be used to break the bond. I offer critical science literacy as a practice that can directly challenge the epistemic authority of Science and be read as "doing science" or more broadly as "rewriting knowledge." Honestly, sounds nothing like the original link which is a poorly written polemic that is obviously done in bad faith (at least to me). I think the abstract is interesting enough that I'll read the paper myself and come to my own conclusions once I have spare time.
- AstralStorm 9y ago
  What a bad thesis. Does she mean western science which is older than 15th century and a reaction against religious enslavement of ideas? Or Chinese science from BC? Out perhaps just industrial revolution, which is just a tiny chunk of whole science? I suspect this is some form of argument from ignorance or cherry picking. The argument "comes from slavery" can be applied to everything. If it is about science fuelling colonialism, perhaps, but the same thing can be said about both capitalism, feudalism and more. People have often used gains of all kinds to further selfish agenda at the cost of others.

The professor's words still stand independent from whatever website decided to feature them.

by Zee2 9y ago

The professor's words still stand independent from whatever website decided to feature them.

Paper: http://catalystjournal.org/ojs/index.php/catalyst/article/view/122/pdf_3 http://catalystjournal.org/ojs/index.php/catalyst/article/vi... Abstract: In this paper, I argue that those of us who have left the Sciences proper and moved to feminist studies spaces have continued to do science through our teaching. In a moment when the impulse to do real science is palpitating in our feminist hearts, I suggest that we critically examine the political stakes of our affective attachments and detachments from s/Science(s). I consider what it means to be attached to a Science that earned its epistemic authority through its co-constitution with colonization and slavery. I argue that passion for science may act to strengthen the relationship between Science and Truth and conversely, willful refusal and failure may be used to break the bond. I offer critical science literacy as a practice that can directly challenge the epistemic authority of Science and be read as "doing science" or more broadly as "rewriting knowledge." Honestly, sounds nothing like the original link which is a poorly written polemic that is obviously done in bad faith (at least to me). I think the abstract is interesting enough that I'll read the paper myself and come to my own conclusions once I have spare time.

AstralStorm 9y ago
What a bad thesis. Does she mean western science which is older than 15th century and a reaction against religious enslavement of ideas? Or Chinese science from BC? Out perhaps just industrial revolution, which is just a tiny chunk of whole science? I suspect this is some form of argument from ignorance or cherry picking. The argument "comes from slavery" can be applied to everything. If it is about science fuelling colonialism, perhaps, but the same thing can be said about both capitalism, feudalism and more. People have often used gains of all kinds to further selfish agenda at the cost of others.