Science Against the Day Labor

[David Morris]

The urge to dominate and control supersedes all mankind's efforts.  That is
more Pynchon's message than Science Vs. Madonna.  GR (&V) is more about a
different S&M.

Poelker's sin was to whore himself for his love of scientific pursuits.  He
had no ideology, only his own obsessions.

Pointsman's sin was self advancement.  He used his method as a tool to
dominate others, not for ideology.

Even school children know that technology can be a blessing and a curse.
 Cults are the tools of people, and cultist and their leaders are

On Thursday, April 18, 2013, alice wellintown wrote:

> Science is not simply a method, like technology it comes with an ideology,
> and as we speak that ideology, driven by science, is, as several here have
> confirmed, beyond reproach. Science is a culture. While it is also a
> method, and in this sense it is like math, it is also a ideological force,
> as it has been in bed with industry and agri-industry, and now with
> business industry and tech-industry, and is the cult that capital has made,
> and this cult is in direct conflict with labor. So, it is OK to resist
> technology and the science cult? Absolutely.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 9:25 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Empirical Practice" starts when a child reaches into a hot flame.  Even
>> amoebae recoil when hurt.
>>
>> Do you imply that Religious Practice isn't reality based?  Religion knows
>> how to control as a primary goal.
>>
>> Science doesn't have a mind of its own.  It ain't the anti-sacred.
>>
>> David Morris
>>
>> On Monday, April 15, 2013, alice wellintown wrote:
>>
>>> If God does not, as Milton sez in his famous sonnet, exact day labor
>>> light denied, this hasn't prevented men from exacting day labor from men,
>>> light, and even life, denied. Science was not much around to make safe the
>>> lives of the working men and women we read about in AGTD. Empirical
>>> practice was the method adopted, trial and selection, the railroad, the
>>> mines, the textile mills, these had not science, and many lives were lost
>>> because safety valves were not devised or employed to protect workers from
>>> exploding steam machines. Sure, science would have made things safer,
>>> better, if not for the workers, for the bosses  and their bosses, but for
>>> safety it was the men who worked the mines the factories who improved the
>>> work, the conditions, the safety. Even the laws of mechanical motion were
>>> not trumped by these pragmatic and practical men who worked, for the most
>>> part, without math or the scientific method. But once science began to
>>> apply its method, like a man with a hammer who sees a nail in every grain
>>> of sand, science applied its "scientific" method to every inch of man and
>>> to every hair and every grain of sand. And so, science, systematically,
>>> took over, from religion, from all other institutions of culture, and to
>>> all inquires, to thought itself, to every mode of investigation, and it
>>> claimed to have a better method for advancing all human persuits and
>>> objectives, even the destruction of all human pursuits and objectives.
>>> Moreover, not satisfied with using tools, extensions of human power, to
>>> improve the human lot, to add human tools and science to the existing
>>> patterns of life, as, say a farmer with a tool in his hand, science
>>> fashioned organisms, including man, for machaniisms, for machines. So, the
>>> huge farms, where science applied its method to plants and animals, and the
>>> huge hospitals (white visitation) where science applied its methods to
>>> human minds, and the huge, world wars where it applied its killing
>>> machines, machines that a man might fly in, if he were fashioned to it and
>>> not the other way round. This is Blicero's launch!
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130418/f5740c56/attachment.html>