Or so the polygenists thought.Interestingly, by criticizing the social and political context of scientific knowledge and discovery, Gould also opens us up to the critique of what we now consider to be truth - that equality (a concept, just like intelligence or inferiority) is a similarly fallible presumption.
But this suggestion is unacceptable in mainstream thought - scientific or otherwise - so we reject this as "not truth".
But if science does not progress inevitably, albeit with mistaken intellectual diversions, towards an objective truth - we can call this scientific evolution - then is our contemporary scientific data simply an aesthetically pleasing explanation for the world in which we now live?
No comments:
Post a Comment