Anti-Science PrejudiceI have heard good things about The Tao of Pooh, and can generally keep an open mind about perspectives and paradigms differing from what I personally identify with. However, anti-science prejudice seems to be blatantly in my face these days. It's starting to annoy me.
I am taking a pre-requisite History of Psychology course this semester, and the prof admits to having a bias against the natural science side of psychology - the side of which I of course happen to prefer. Admitting his bias doesn't do much to curb how it manifests in the teaching style, however, and the prof takes every chance he can get to shit on natural science psych: John Watson was a manipulative anti-ethical evil man, "science" seeks to alienate the individual, "science" is blind to human emotion, "science" prides itself on a false sense of objectivity. Yes, okay, fine - some of these comments are based in truth and these criticisms need to be made. But focusing solely on these aspects of natural science psych and ignoring the numerous beneficial aspects is just plain ignorant.
So that is what I have to deal with 3 times a week: blah blah blah natural science is evil, blah blah blah science sucks. There's only so much of that I can take, and I don't need to see it reflected in books I'm reading for pleasure.
The Tao of Pooh is similarly afflicted with blatant, uninformed, prejudiced views of science.
"the Brain, the Academician, the dry-as-dust Absentminded Professor. Far from reflecting the Taoist ideal of wholeness and independence, this incomplete and unbalanced creature divides all kinds of abstract things into little categories and compartments while remaining rather helpless and disorganized in his daily life" (25).
"It is very hard to find any of the spirit of Taoism in the lifeless writings of the humorless Academic Mortician, whose bleached-out Scholarly Dissertations contain no more of the character of Taoist wisdom than does the typical wax museum" (26).
"The Confusionist, Desiccated Scholar is one who studies Knowledge for the sake of Knowledge, and who keeps what he learns to himself or to his own small group, writing pompous and pretentious papers that no one else can understand, rather than working for the enlightenment of others" (26).
etc. It goes on endlessly in similar manners.
So, as scientists, we are: incomplete, unbalanced, helpless, disorganized, humorless, wisdomless, pompous, pretentious, and of course, MALE.
This smacks of generalizations, prejudice, hate, misinformation, hypocrisy, a complete lack of a desire to be understanding and tolerant of opposing positions, and not to mention condescending as all fuck. This from someone promoting a life-philosophy of enlightenment?
Pardon me while I vomit my scientific lifelessness and arrogance all over this piece of hypocritical hate "literature".
Listening to: Secret - Maroon 5