7/29/2019 Notes on Epilogue of Fashionable Nonsense

1/2

Epilogue of FASHIONABLE NONSENSE

Opening Paragraphs

P. 182 183 Our focus is limited to certain intellectual aspects of postmodernism that have had an

impact on the humanities and the social sciences: a fascination with obscure discourses; an epistemic

relativism linked to a generalized skepticism toward modern science; an excessive interest in subjective

beliefs independently of their truth or falsity; and an emphasis on discourse and language as opposed to

the facts to which those discourses refer (or, worse, the rejection of the very idea that fact exists or that

one may refer to them).

P. 182Let us start by recognizing that many postmodern ideas, expressed in a moderate form,

provide a needed correction to nave modernism (belief in indefinite and continuous progress,

scientism, cultural Eurocentrism, etc.)

For a Real Dialogue Between the Two Cultures

P. 184 Over the past few years, it has become fashionable to talk about a so-called science war. But

this phrase is quite unfortunate. Who is waging war, and against whom?

P. 185if one day the biological bases of our behavior were sufficiently well understood to serve as

foundation for the study of human beings, there would be no reason to fear that the disciplines we now

call social sciences would somehow disappear or become mere branches of biology.

Lessons:

1. Its a good idea to know what one is talking about.2. Not all that is obscure is necessarily profound.3. Science is not a text.4. Dont ape the natural sciences.

P. 187 even if one adopts a reductionistphilosophicalattitude, one is by no means obliged to

pursue reductionism as a methodological prescription.

P. 188 Psychologists, for example, do not need to invoke quantum mechanics to maintain that

in their fieldthe observer affects the observed; this is a truism, irrespective of the behavior of

electrons or atoms.

5. Be wary of argument from authority.

6. Specific skepticism should not be confused with radical skepticism.

7. Ambiguity as subterfuge.

How did we get here?

1. Neglect of the empirical.2. Scientism in the social sciences.3. The prestige of the natural sciences.

7/29/2019 Notes on Epilogue of Fashionable Nonsense

2/2

4. The social sciences natural relativism.5. The traditional philosophical and literary training.

The Role of Politics

1. The new social movements.2. Political discouragement.3. Science as an easy target.

For a long time, Ive been a fan of critical ideas. Without necessarily being a through and trough critical

thinker, I am thrilled no end to read grand and brand new ideas that counter existing ones. Theres a

sense of satisfaction in knowing that one knows better than the average ready believer. When I

started studying sociology, my notebook cover featured three critical thinkers: Marx, Weber, and

Foucault. I labeled them with increasing degrees of criticality in that order. Marx is critical ofcapitalism; Weber is critical of both capitalism and socialism; and Foucault is critical not only of

capitalism and socialism, but of sociology itself including other human sciences.

I thought that thats the way to go if I did not want to get complacent with my sociological studies. In

many ways, sociology already provides its students with ammunition by which it can shoot down

theoretical and empirical claims.