|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | ''What would we [[anarchize:body, cognition and senses]] for?''
| + | nn |
| − | | + | |
| − | == to anarchize other things ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === the UnWikipedia ===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | A wiki or a wiki space *ONLY* for articles deleted from [[Wikipedia]] by [[sysop vandalism]] would help those who want to remove a certain bias embedded in every article, e.g. [[mechanistic bias]] or [[authoritarian bias]] which are the natural [[systemic bias]]es of Wikipedia itself because of its authoritarian geeks in charge. This is probably impossible or at best inefficient unless we [[anarchize:body, cognition and senses]] material here first, and know how to do that and what [[naming convention]]s apply.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | To restore the natural human-body-centric view of real humans with real bodies, replacing [[Wikipedia]]'s ideal of pure [[ideology]], symbol [[recognition]] and [[operant conditioning]], would definitely be something worth doing and fighting '''for'''.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === DemocraticDomain ===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | If [[domain name]]s and [[web hosting]] and [[email service]]s of a [[large public wiki]] and its [[wiki management]] can be handled democratically so it is possible to for all users to potentially campaign to be the "domain owner", then, what is the basic list of terms that such an [[anarchize]]d namespace must rely on? Just as [[Wikipedia]] could not work without a classic [[God's Eye View]] fascist creating its initial set of articles (this was [[Larry's Text]] by [[Larry Sanger]]) it is not possible to do it right here without an anarchized way of talking about issues.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | If only a minimal institution where no one has special priveleges, that is designed to actively prevent a [[command hierarchy]] from existing, that could be close to a real [[anarchization]]. It would be a good prototype for the vanguard [[world trolling anarchization]] to do this to the entire web and disenfranchise anti-democratic "domain owners". To do these at [[Anarchopedia:Itself]] would be much less risky if [[Anarchopedia:we]] already knew how to recognize the people who were already themselves anarchized, e.g. the fellow who added the last comment to this page below.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ==Scope:==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | This [[anarchization]] aims to organize all articles on the human '''Body, Cognition and Senses''' so that they reference each other in a rational way, and do not make sloppy claims that cannot be justified by rational analysis. This has often noted as an issue in scientific, medical and some forms of social discourse, and about English speaking culture, which tends to assume a top-down and trustworthy authority which can be said to define [[truth]] with regard to disposition of bodies and trust in the senses. ''See the considerable literature on [[subject-object problem]].''
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == Mechanistic assumptions ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | A simple way of stating the problem is that [[science]] and [[mathematics]] are treated as mystical authorities, despite the distributed, collective and error-prone nature of both activities. This introduces severe [[mechanistic bias]] that becomes [[authoritarian bias]] - see [[Frederick Engels]] ''[[On Authority]]'' especially on this question.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | After the disastrous [[technocrat]]ic [[20th century]] in which [[technological escalation]] became the norm, there has been a shift back to sanity in philosophy:
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Work on the [[quasi-empiricism in mathematics]], on [[philosophy of mathematics]] arising from [[cognitive science]], and on [[integrity]] as it applies to the [[philosophy of science]], has improved the situation somewhat. But, it is fair to say that certain things are just not stated in a neutral way in most English language discourse:
| + | |
| − | *[[science]] is a very disciplined and collective form of cognition, but it has no powers that individual cognition does not have, and there are many weak links in the chain that combines cognition - the writing of papers, peer review, etc. - [[scientific method]] deals with these only in a quite abstract and general way - in reality each [[science]] has its own method, and its own constraints, and its own peers, terminology, apparatus and measurements, and claims made in one are simply not equivalent or necessarily comparable to those that are made in the others
| + | |
| − | *[[mathematics]] is a wonderful way to manipulate measurements once they are made, but the standardization of *how* they are made, from what bodies via what senses standing where, is part of [[foundations of measurement]] which is not normally considered a part of [[philosophy of mathematics]], oddly.
| + | |
| − | *[[engineering]] combines results from multiple sciences, which always requires the trial and error process and some [[risk]], but quite often, this too is represented as having [[certainty]] - the result is things like the [[Titanic]], [[Chernobyl]], [[Bhopal]], [[Challenger]], [[Columbia]] etc.
| + | |
| − | *[[medicine]], and the almost mystical role of the [[doctor]], is assumed to have powers to see into bodies, to fix them, extend life, etc., but very often, statements of cause and effect, strategies for diagnosis and treatment, are very inexact and usually also part of the testing and training of doctors, drugs, and etc. - this is really an investigative process but it is often portrayed as being as authoritative as diagnosing a machine's faults with a manual, ordering parts, and effecting repairs.
| + | |
| − | *the separate authoritative, investigative and definitive modes of [[doubt]] and [[truth]] are not separated, leading to confusion and over-reliance on [[conceptual metaphor]] to make the point.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | [[Eugene Wigner]] pointed out that the nearly mystical coordination between say mathematics and physics, did not work for any reason anyone could say. It still works, and still for reasons no one can say. It's time to stop saying we ''do'' know, and rewrite a lot of articles.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | [[Michel Foucault]] pointed out that this assignment of the "wise and noble man" role to the doctor was eventually forgotten, and they used the language and terminology of science instead to gain the respect and obedience of patients. The language by which they did so is now in our vernacular, and should not be reflected in a general purpose work taking neutral positions on medical methods.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | In some cultures, notably in the [[Anarchopedia:USPOV|US]] and [[Anarchopedia:UKPOV|UK]], which have a
| + | |
| − | [[Anarchopedia:EPOV|history of top-down control of other cultures]], and of scholastic [[Platonism]], many [[point of view]] issues and [[subject-object problem]]s creep into language, reflecting many odd assumptions inherited from traditional professions and academic departments that created most of the [[knowledge]], without really knowing how it would all fit together - on Wikipedia...
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == Systemic bias ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | The [[mechanistic paradigm]] (which this project aims to eliminate [[mechanistic bias|as a bias]]) assumes among other things that:
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | *[[hominoid]]s are "human" and have such attributes as [[speech]] and [[human rights]], while other [[hominid]] are fundamentally different beings and that there is no need to differentiate between (challenged by such concepts as [[Great Ape personhood]], [[ape genocide]], [[ape language]] studies and discoveries about hominid [[genetics]], [[motherhood]] and [[culture]])
| + | |
| − | *the [[body]] is a machine, can be diagnosed, fixed (articles on [[medicine]] may take this view but general [[science]] articles should avoid it), and is an object rather than a subject (see [[subject-object problem]] and [[philosophy of action]]), generated only by [[gene]]s, say, and not by some [[epigenetic]] interaction of genes with [[environment]] (see [[morphogenetic field]] for one such alternative view)
| + | |
| − | *[[cognition]] is a passive process involving sensing what is objectively "there" (and is something that each body does individually with no direct help from any other body or social structure, e.g. there "cannot be" any such sense as [[morphogenetic field|"being stared at"]], etc.)
| + | |
| − | *the senses only detect, and what more, they detect what is objectively "there", like frequencies of light and sound (which are investigated in [[physics]] but whose characteristics as reported via human cognition alone are often quite different, e.g. [[naive physics]]).
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | These dogmas add nothing to Anarchopedia, contradict its [[anarchist]] [[ethics]], and reflect a [[19th century]] view that is generally not part of modern science and defies the [[philosophy of science]], as presently understood. Assumptions like this are even being challenged in [[medicine]], [[engineering]], [[economics]], [[law]], as well as emerging fields like [[cognitive psychology]], [[anthropological linguistics]] and [[cognitive science of mathematics]]. Since the beginning of the [[Wikipedia]][http://textbook.wikipedia.org textbook project], the pressure to act as a medical or engineering textbook has been reduced on [[Wikipedia]], but they continue to pollute the [[GFDL corpus]] as the central [[GFDL corpus access provider]] - so we should take this opportunity to rewrite this stuff and [[to anarchize]] all of it.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ----------
| + | |
| − | ''Some comments on the above agenda by [[Wikipedia power structure]], showing their simple-minded stupidity and pettiness:''
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Who is all this by? Is this NPOV? -- [[User:Tarquin|Tarquin]] 09:13, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :''Note: "is this NPOV" is [[sysop vandalism|sysop vandal]] code for "can I delete this and say "POV" as my only excuse?''
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | This is by a anonymous but well-known user who
| + | |
| − | * has a policy of not registering a user name
| + | |
| − | * has a personal philosophical agenda which is pretty well stated here
| + | |
| − | * which is a mixture of mainstream progressive ideas and ''really quite curious'' idiosyncratic stuff
| + | |
| − | * and often tends to write new articles that express these opinions as generally accepted, which is rather POV to say the least
| + | |
| − | -- [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] 09:57, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | It appears as if this entire article is one man's unusual and POV belief system. Why is an article? Since it is not a Wikipedia project, then should not all this be moved to this person's personal page? [[User:JeMa|JeMa]] 20:18, 24 Nov 2003
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :As there were no objections for over a month, this is what I have now done. [[User:Angela|Angela]][[user talk:Angela|.]]
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | What? This is a valuable page, and one which I would like to see expanded. This is an important area of philosophy which is just beginning to blossom. We can re-write it as NPOV, but no need to take it out of the loop, so to speak. [[User:ChrisAnderson|ChrisAnderson]]
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ''Perhaps this last comrade, who has identified himself as a friend, will take an interest in this and in [[Anarchopedia]].''
| + | |
