segunda-feira, 11 de dezembro de 2023

About the "pseudosciences of good", "leftist", and the most serious

 Pseudosciences are scientifically unproven theories and techniques, with remote to zero potential for proof and which aim to pass themselves off as science. Homeopathy, astrology, Freudian theory, the anti-vaccine movement and flat earthism are examples of pseudosciences. Pseudoscience is a common type of pseudo-intellectualism, that is, a false philosophy, a supposed love for wisdom or knowledge, but which, in fact, expresses itself as its falsification.



An example of pseudo-intellectualism, relevant to this text, which is also expressed as pseudoscience is that of radical egalitarianism.


Although individuals from across the political-ideological spectrum adopt pseudosciences or "pseudo-intellectualisms" as primary references for interpreting reality, these types of intellectual deviations seem to have been adopted more frequently by those who declare themselves "on the left".


Finally, there is a third deviation from wisdom, anti-intellectualism, in which, instead of passing itself off as knowledge, it denies it by appealing, generally explicitly, to the emotional, instinctive and subjective. A classic example of anti-intellectualism is religion, especially religious fundamentalism. The latter is adopted more frequently by individuals who declare themselves "right-wing".


Religion, as it has historically developed and constituted, can also be considered a false philosophy.


The difference between anti-intellectualism and pseudo-intellectualism is the same between a religious priest and a priest posing as a scientific authority.


So, despite the unprecedented advances in science/technology in recent centuries, pseudosciences continue to perpetuate themselves through the constant renewal of followers, also because the majority of human beings are more irrational than rational.


And, if thanks to relative secularization, primarily in Western societies, anti-intellectualism, particularly religion, has diminished its cultural influence, it seems that it has only been to replace it with pseudo-intellectualism within the main institutions, as in education, in the media and even in governments, passing off as knowledge and/or legitimate rational/philosophical judgments, being adopted as references for public policies and, from this, causing even more (serious) problems than solving existing ones.


I like to call these pseudosciences that are more ideologically aligned with the "left" "pseudosciences of good" because, in addition to behaving illegitimately like sciences and/or philosophy, they are also based on the prioritization of morality or moral discernment, than if considers as right or wrong, above rationality or intellectual discernment, of what is perceived as true or false, clearly an inversion of the "golden" order of wisdom in which, first, facts or evidence are prioritized and, then, judgment (moral) of how to act based on them. This is the same order of justice in its most appropriate practice, of impartial and objective thinking in search of truth, because the most fair is also what is most true or factual.


An example of the very negative impact of these "good" pseudosciences deeply infiltrated in the most important institutions in Western countries has been the imposition of a policy favorable to mass immigration and "multiculturalism" because it has altered the ethnic-racial composition of these countries, in addition also cause a large increase in crime and cultural conflicts. This policy has been based on the following assumptions*: the belief that the environment has a more determining influence on human beings than biology, informally called the "blank slate"; that human races do not exist and/or that their differences in behavior and intelligence are absolute reflections of their cultures and not also or mainly of their biology, that is, that they are only superficial; the same denialism also applied to differences between the sexes; and the adoption of anti-racist fallacies, particularly the narrative of "white guilt" as the dominant moral code, in which only white people of European origin who, in general, should be held morally responsible for the social and historical ills of other ethnic-racial groups, especially black people of African origin, which consists of a highly biased or distorted interpretation of historical facts and with implications that are opposed to true social justice, by placing all the blame on a vaguely defined group category and which, in fact, is of a "scapegoat", for not being the group most directly responsible for human ills throughout our history, the political-economic "elites".


Nenhum comentário:

Postar um comentário