Fundamentalisms, worlds and science
01
Dec
The fact known to scientists, thinkers, philosophers and also some
theologians, that Western thought is experiencing a crisis is a fact, what would be its roots is another problem.
Much of the thinking, to our correct view is that the basis of this error is the foundation of the Western Enlightenment thought it was idealism, not how they think the fundamentalists and nostalgic (right and left as Bauman) who claim that it is a crisis of modernity, but it was born of the Enlightenment and idealism, so is there a base.
Umberto Eco wrote a nice article: “Ciência, erro e fundamentalismo” (Science, error and fundamentalism) in which states:
“The problem is that much of the criticism of the ideology of progress (or the so-called spirit of the Enlightenment), the spirit of science is often identified with certain idealistic philosophies of the century. XIX, according to which history is directed always for the best, or the triumphant realization of itself, spirit or other life force that is always in motion toward a good end. ”
All developmental vision, “critical” to the objects as “disturbing” the subject, is what Bruno Latour calls “hell´s dichotomies” because it is in the marrow of Western thought, in which the naive fundamentalist thought is the most radical.
Bruno Latour in his book never been modern unveils major gossip illogical, a-scientific and fundamentalists, created a concept called symmetrical anthropology, in which he analyzes it is not dialogues between “areas of knowledge”, but among world such as: “Amerindian and modern science” and other “hybrid” issues that actually speak of different worlds and not areas of knowledge.
This applies to the network because the anthropological knowledge networking, there is therefore a dilution of the idea of authorship, where the multiplicity.
