Sapere Aude!

From Less Than Human

From David Smith's Less Than Human: Why We Demean, Enslave, and Exterminate Others:

"During their journey through time, prehistoric humans acquired a range of mental aptitudes that we take for granted today, but which were almost certainly absent during the earliest stages of hominid evolution. These include the physical traits that are necessary conditions for dehumanization, namely;

1. A domain-specific folk biology module responsible for parsing the biology world into natural kinds (species) and making inferences about them.

2. A domain-specific folk sociology module responsible for parsing the social world into natural kinds (ethnoraces) and making inferences about them.

3. A domain-general capacity for second-order thought that makes it possible to reflect one's own mental states.

4. An intuitive theory of essences used to explain why there are natural kinds.

5. An intuitive theory of natural hierarchy (great chain of being) for ordering the natural world."

 

NYU Student Tries To Get Professor Fired Over Current Events Assignment

NYU senior Sara Ackerman engaged in a war with college administration over her refusal to do a class assignment about the Occupy Wall Street protests.

NYU Local reports that the drama became public around 3 a.m. on Wednesday morning, when Ackerman sent out a series of bizarre emails chronicling the conflict. It began over an ethnographic assignment on Occupy Wall Street, which Ackerman said "forced" her to talk to "criminals, drug addicts, mentally ill people, and of course, the few competent, mentally stable people that stationed themselves at Zuccotti Park."

She wrote that her one visit to the protests -- with "two other young girls, who are quite attractive and thin, and don't look particularly physically fit enough to take on a potential predator, rapist, paranoid schizophrenic, etc." -- left her feeling like she had "escaped an extremely dangerous -- and even, life threatening -- situation." She refused to do the project, and requested an alternate assignment.

Ackerman's emails also singled out the class's TA for not calling on her in class, even though she left her hand up for 75 seconds on one occasion. Read the full emails at NYU Local.

via www.huffingtonpost.com

Although this one sounds like an extreme case, it's not all that uncommon for students to complain that they are "forced" to learn about things against their preferred beliefs.  It's completely childish.  It's like complaining about your parents "forcing" you to eat your veggies.

The Science of Pleasure

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Moral philosophers have to pay attention to this stuff.

Rick Santorum: The Idea Of Climate Change Is A Liberal Conspiracy | TPMDC

Santorum was on Rush Limbaugh's radio show Wednesday, where he was asked whether he agrees with Mitt Romney's comments from last Friday, embracing the universally accepted science of man-made climate change.

Santorum replied:

I believe the earth gets warmer and I also believe the earth gets cooler, and I think history points out that it does that and that the idea that man, through the production of CO2 -- which is a trace gas in the atmosphere, and the manmade part of that trace gas is itself a trace gas -- is somehow responsible for climate change is, I think, just patently absurd.

Santorum continued that the idea of man-made climate change may be part of a liberal conspiracy: "To me this is an opportunity for the left to create -- it's really a beautifully concocted scheme because they know that the earth is gonna cool and warm. It's been on a warming trend so they said, 'Oh, let's take advantage of that and say that we need the government to come in and regulate your life some more because it's getting warmer.'"

"It's just an excuse for more government control of your life," he added, "and I've never been for any scheme or even accepted the junk science behind the whole narrative."

via tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com

Santorum is the anti-science candidate. Conservatives think climate change, evolution, and the notion that sexual orientation is influenced by biology are all liberal hoaxes based on "junk science."  But, the GOP is a "big tent" party that has room for reasonable disagreement, right?  Wrong!  Mitt Romney dares to deviate from GOP ideology and Rush Limbaugh declares there's no way he can win the nomination.  Meanwhile  . . .

Thank You For Smoking, Critical Thinking, and Informal Fallacies

Thank You For Smoking is a pretty entertaining movie, but it's also good material for a critical thinking and logical reasoning exercise.  You can use it to discuss the difference between sophism and logical reasoning, critical thinking about media, and as an informal fallacy identification exercise.  After you've studied informal fallacies and some basic principles of logic screen the film and complete each of the following.  

1. Is Nick Naylor argue logically and evidentially or does he argue prudentially?  

2. Review the informal fallacies we covered.  See how many informal fallacies you can find in the movie.  Remember that in order for there to be a fallacy, a character must be making an argument and not all forms of expression are arguments.  Write down the name of the character that makes the argument, briefly summarize the argument, and identify the informal fallacy that is committed.  

3. Nick's job requires him to defend the tobacco industry's image and one of the things that threatens that image is the link between cancer and smoking cigarettes. Describe how Nick goes about challenging that claim.  Is there really a scientifically proven link between smoking cigarettes and cancer or is it a legitimate scientific controversy.  

4. Are the debates over global warming, evolution and intelligent design, and the biology of sexual orientation legitimate controversies or are they manufactured controversies created by what are essentially PR campaigns?  How might one distinguished between legitimate controversies and manufactured controversies?  Is there a Nick Naylor of global warming, intelligent design, etc.?  

Bill O'Reilly Still Does Not Understand 8th Grade Science, Basic Logic (Part II)

He's mystified by the tides and the existence of the moon causes him problems too.

He's the poster child for scientific illiteracy.  I mean, really!  You can google this shit, dude!  It's bad enough that he doesn't have a grasp of basic scientific findings about the universe.  But, it's even worse that he constantly employes the argument from ignorance fallacy as way of trying to justify his preferred religious views.  Even if we did not have an understanding of how the moon formed, it doesn't follow that an omnicompetent god did it.  It's just plain said that people listen to this guy.

Unethical Animal Testing?

Bill O'Reilly Does Not Understand 8th Grade Science, Basic Logic

If you are religious and want to understand why so many atheists seem angry about religion that clip should explain it all.  For O'Reilly, like many others, God serves as an explanation for what he does not understand.   Perhaps the most charitable way to interpret O'Reilly's remarks is as an example of design in nature.  But, of course there's a really good scientific explanation for why the tide goes in and out, as most with an 8th grade grasp of science know.  So, it's simply not the case that we cannot explain the tide.  But, even if it was an unexplained phenomena, why should we conclude that God does it?  The conclusion that 'God directs the tides' does not follow from the absence of another explanation. O'Reilly's line of reasoning is based on factual error and an appeal to ignorance fallacy.  It's pretty bad reasoning but he seems convinced that he's correct and the skeptic is wrong nonetheless. 

The Inappropriate Injection of Religion into Politics

Here's a perfect example of the inappropriate injection of religion into politics. 

We don't need to worry about the environment because God said so.  

Extreme Weather, Climate Disinformation