foolrush

16 ms·

211.
by foolrush 9y ago
The trite example I listed _is_ obvious, yet as obvious as it is, some folks insist that “science” is this free thinking process. Foucault of course is much more expansive than my trivial example, covering the notion of institutions as ideo
212.
by foolrush 9y ago
While most heavy rationalists insist that Foucault is full of rubbish, it is pretty easy to see how his vantage has a significant degree of merit, even if one entirely ignores the transmission of ideology. If we look to "science"
213.
by foolrush 9y ago
See “On Exactitude in Science” by Jorge Luis Borges.
214.
by foolrush 9y ago
Likely the False Narrative myth at work in a similar fashion to attributing a narrative structure to the universe for example. As a counterpoint, Foucault's Order of Things offers up a historical “archaeology” of the sciences congruent
215.
by foolrush 9y ago
1/3 of all people killed by strangers are killed by police officers. https://granta.com/violence-in-blue/
216.
by foolrush 9y ago
The history of policing is worth historicizing; policing was a result of protection of capital.
217.
by foolrush 9y ago
Have you ever given a public presentation in front of a number of people? Nervous tics can become augmented. Screaming “CRAWL TOWARDS ME” after you are instructed to put hands in air is absolutely criminal; it is coaxing a cognitive disson
218.
by foolrush 9y ago
There are now a hundred years of research regarding the social sciences and humanities. Your scare quotes betray your knowledge on the matter. Perhaps you should research equal "science" claims such as the anchoring effect or such
219.
by foolrush 9y ago
Apple Trailers on Android?
220.
by foolrush 9y ago
Historcise. Science hasn't always been here as some form of ground truth. Science still relies on philosophical needs to form its epistemological base. The fault lines lay in the models and metrics which are inherently laden with ideol
221.
Perspectives and Opportunities for New Data Dialects(epicpeople.org)
1 points by foolrush 9y ago|0 comments
222.
Why Has It Taken the Menstrual Cup So Long to Go Mainstream?(psmag.com)
5 points by foolrush 9y ago|1 comments
223.
The Google Anti-Diversity Memo Author Did a Twitter Poll on “Cool” KKK Titles(buzzfeed.com)
20 points by foolrush 9y ago|11 comments
224.
by foolrush 9y ago
> The book was a crystalization of views he had developed over the preceding decades, when he had done the most to develop postmodernism. Key point is that his readings of Marxism weren't central to his core tools of Postmodernism,
225.
by foolrush 9y ago
There is at least a sense that the scientist in question disagrees with the application of their research as it stands. Further, more recent research cited here, Brian Nosek (PhD Psychology): “My takeaways: Some observed effects are easy to
226.
by foolrush 9y ago
I don't recall ever reading Derrida as a fervent Marxist. Sartre's somewhat predates postmodernist canon. Marx would be a bit of a grandfather in deconstruction. Hard not to move forward without acknowledging his presence[1]. >
227.
by foolrush 9y ago
If history is any guide, expect a rejection and push against. Possibly with the self referential sign of a sign[1]. Heck... We are already almost there with humourous memes that reference another meme. If anything, Vapor Wave and the retro
228.
by foolrush 9y ago
I love the tongue in cheek site. Cracked me up. Brutalism is peak Late Modernism in the sense that it is the complete exorcising of cultural symbology via ornamentation. The timing of Brutalism isn't coincidental; it actively marched l
229.
Here’s your point by point refutation of the Google memo(medium.com)
1 points by foolrush 9y ago|0 comments
230.
by foolrush 9y ago
More recent studies cited by Brian Nosek here: https://twitter.com/BrianNosek/status/895410735412543492 And one of his summary tweets: > “My takeaways: Some observed effects are easy to attribute to culture and
231.
by foolrush 9y ago
And the author of the paper (implicitly) cited disagrees with the claims. http://www.wired.co.uk/article/google-fires-engineer-over-an...
232.
by foolrush 9y ago
Thanks for the piece. Sadly never came across it.
233.
by foolrush 9y ago
You haven't read a single text that falls under the banner of Postmodern. Please stop using the term. As the other commenter has noted, you need to historcise. Continental philosophers didn't just plop onto the scene buoyed by mul
234.
by foolrush 9y ago
Who do you think defined notions of truth? Scientists? Or were scientists philosophers interested in epistemology? No, not being a smart ass. "Science" as we know it today is an invention. It hasn't been around forever. It is
235.
by foolrush 9y ago
Feel free to explore what truth is. Hint: You will end up in epistemology. It is also clear you have never read a Postmodern text in your life.
236.
by foolrush 9y ago
The search for truth is fundamentally epistemological. There is a fascinating dive into just what science is, when it began, etc. One might disagree with his language, but this post is remarkably insightful to begin such a dive: http
237.
by foolrush 9y ago
Would phrenology be acceptable to "debate"? Or race based "debates"? It is remarkable how the need for debate is disproportionately forwarded from the side with power.
238.
by foolrush 9y ago
You realize that science is ideological, epistemological, and political? Edit: I appreciate all of the vote downs. Empiricism is as guilty in choosing models according to power dynamics as any ideological endeavor. See phrenology. To sugges
239.
Even the guy behind the research thinks that Googler is wrong(wired.co.uk)
3 points by foolrush 9y ago|0 comments
240.
by foolrush 9y ago
For the record, the "facts" cited in her post are indeed questionable. A decent sociological analysis has been making the rounds, including https://ifstudies.org/blog/five-facts-about-women-and-men-in... and

More ›