tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-78517684417601082.post3833077114603011937..comments2023-11-02T09:05:03.031-07:00Comments on Dee's Updates: Yes, Renee, anthropology can be useful!Deehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16345066981389467770noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-78517684417601082.post-89351248744161417132009-06-21T23:28:04.433-07:002009-06-21T23:28:04.433-07:00How can I not comment on this one.
First Happy ...How can I not comment on this one. <br /><br />First Happy Father's Day to all you fathers out there following Dee's blog. Next, right on g/f. Thank goodness the voice of reason was heard there. While I still think a majority of anthropologists turn their noses at the idea of Indigenous science, I am glad to know at least 3, including Dee, that are willing to endure the snobs and false prophets(or shall I say profits) because they believe, truly believe, they can make a difference. <br /><br />:) Now if you all can just make an Indigenous specialty group or sub group in the Anthropology Association's annual meeting, you can work together to have an even farther reach...oh wait, I kind of remember someone saying that didn't work out so well, something about getting the paternal pat on the back for "interesting" perspective, but that it wasn't really "science". Well, come on over to Geography. We have a growing membership of young students and Indigenous scholars flocking to hear all about working with and for Indigenous communities as opposed to studying them. :)<br /><br />Okay, okay, just having some fun. I am glad the chapter is having a positive effect somewhere. Your experience reminds me of an episode on Numbers. I taped it and wrote the phrase down. <br /><br />"We observe the universe through a limited prism of our senses. Acknowledging the possibility, the very likelihood that there are realities that lie beyond the realm of our senses is not a debate about belief systems, so much as an examination of alternative methodologies. Holding on to the belief 'that science must be provable, verifiable, and repeatable' excludes any and all contradictory assumptions…and that IS NOT science…that is politics." <br /><br />It just does not abide by the laws Western science has designed for itself to continue to deny all other contradictory assumptions, be it epistemological, ontological, axiological, or methodological. To continue to do so is to acknowledge the greater degree to which Western science has become subsumed by profit mongering politicians. I don't believe it. I don't think any true scientist can continue to hold to the Kuhnian logic of the scientific model at the expense of everything else. All those others are not true scientists at all...they have sold out for glory, fame, fortune or some other egotistical distraction. Please tell me that is not the majority of people at NSF. Please, oh please, great spirit let the match Dee used to bring light to the darkened halls of "Science" spark a bonfire of activity in the minds and hearts of those ready to venture into the unexplored (or rarely explored) wings. I need not "see it to believe it." I know it is an eventuality awaiting opportunity. Dee, thank you for nudging it along.mapdrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14561605254792510645noreply@blogger.com