Birner Quote - 2

Date: 2020-08-17

Full quote

INDIVIDUALISTS AND THE MOB: CAN CRITICAL RATIONALISM SURVIVE?

“By its very nature, critical rationalism attracts philosophers who believe in the force of critical argument. Let us assume (realistically, I think) that the type of personality with a firm belief in the power of criticism is less prone than the average academic to devote resources to the social networking and academic politicking that are needed to create an environment in which his or her intellectual offspring can survive…

“Until recently not only philosophers but some (outstanding) practising scientists (who are more likely to cultivate the social conditions that are necessary to carry on with their work), too, supported critical rationalism. This allowed critical rationalism to become a tradition for at least a couple of generations. In the mean time, however, the number of scientific disciplines, journals and scientists has increased. The professionalization of science has gone hand in hand with a drop in interest in philosophy on the part of scientists. The academic environment has changed and selection pressures have increased greatly. In this new environment, the support of scientists is lacking while the contents of critical rationalism continue to select against the type of personal characteristics that make it possible for individuals to adopt or have access to at least elements of different traditions. The situation of carriers of the tradition of critical rationalism being incapable of adopting or having access to alternative traditions is tantamount to the non-existence of alternative traditions. If critical rationalists continue to fail to adopt alternative traditions, or at least elements of them, critical rationalism risks becoming entrenched – and extinct.”

Jack Birner, ‘From Group Selection to Ecological Niches,’ in ‘Rethinking Popper,’ ed. Zuzana Parusnikova.

higher level pass, focusing on content; for use in later analysis

This is an outline of Birner’s quote.

paragraph 1

outline of sentence or partial sentence	comment (if any)
paragraph 1
	> “By its very nature, critical rationalism attracts philosophers who believe in the force of critical argument.”
CR attracts thinkers that believe in the reach/value/efficacy of criticism.
This is intrinsic to CR.
	> “Let us assume (realistically, I think) that the type of personality with a firm belief in the power of criticism is less prone than the average academic to devote resources to the social networking and academic politicking that are needed to create an environment in which his or her intellectual offspring can survive.”
Ideas can only survive in the right environment, which must be created (it isn’t natural or the default).
Skills are needed for philosophers to create an environment for the survival of their ideas.	(Implication? The environment that ideas survive in is specific to each thinker/idea s.t. cooperation isn’t possible?)
Those skills are social networking and politicking.
Philosophers attracted to CR find it easier to avoid doing those things (via their type of personality).	(Implied: there’s a reason not to do them; some trade off; academics do it against their will; or something nasty about them; etc)
paragraph 2
	> “Until recently not only philosophers but some (outstanding) practising scientists (who are more likely to cultivate the social conditions that are necessary to carry on with their work), too, supported critical rationalism.”
both philosophers and scientists supported CR until recently.	when? vague
those scientists often created social conditions to facilitate their work.	the philosophers too? doesn’t seem like it from the text
	> “This allowed critical rationalism to become a tradition for at least a couple of generations.”
the support by thinkers and scientists allowed CR to be a tradition
that tradition lasted a few generations.
	> “In the mean time, however, the number of scientific disciplines, journals and scientists has increased.”
the number of journals, science disciplines, and scientists has gone up.
this happened “in the mean time”.	“in the mean time” -> refers to “until recently” at start of paragraph? Between now and the stopping of support? maybe the mean time is since CR became a tradition? Is he implying the stopping of support has something to do with journals, no. of disciplines, and no. of scientists?
	> “The professionalization of science has gone hand in hand with a drop in interest in philosophy on the part of scientists.”
science has been professionalized.	what does that mean? how long has it been happening? is it the same thing as the no. of scientists, disciplines, journals increasing?
scientists have lost interest (somewhat) in philosophy.	have they? just recently or since when?
the professionalization and losing interest go hand in hand	what’s the causal link? Birner seems to imply causality
	> “The academic environment has changed and selection pressures have increased greatly.”
the academic environment has changed.
selection pressures have increased.	which selection pressures?
	> “In this new environment, the support of scientists is lacking while the contents of critical rationalism continue to select against the type of personal characteristics that make it possible for individuals to adopt or have access to at least elements of different traditions.”
this new environment is different.	which environment? the one with the journals? the current one? the one that scientists created? the ones that philosophers need to create for their ideas to survive?
scientists aren’t supporting CR much.
there is a type of personal characteristics which are necessary to adopt/access traditions outside CR	wtf
CR’s contents makes it hard for people with those personal characteristics to be part of CR	“[…] the contents of CR continue to select […]”, what are the contents of CR? Is that not CR itself?
access to different traditions is not possible for CR ppl mostly	wtf
	> “The situation of carriers of the tradition of critical rationalism being incapable of adopting or having access to alternative traditions is tantamount to the non-existence of alternative traditions.”
some ppl in CR carry the tradition of CR
if those carriers can’t adopt/access other traditions it is the same as there not being any other traditions
	> “If critical rationalists continue to fail to adopt alternative traditions, or at least elements of them, critical rationalism risks becoming entrenched – and extinct.”
if CR ppl don’t adopt other traditions:
CR will become entrenched	what does entrenched mean here? intuition is the opposite of extinct
CR will become extinct
both will happen.	at the same time? Birner doesn’t use ‘then’ like “entrenched - and then extinct”, so presumably at the same time.

You can leave a comment anonymously. No sign up or login is required. Use a junk email if not your own; email is only for notifications—though, FYI, I will be able to see it.