From: mccolm@darwin.math.usf.edu. (Gregory McColm)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.meta
Subject: Re: MINDWALK - An exercise in Passionate Thought
Date: 4 Jan 93 19:35:59 GMT
Organization: Univ. of South Florida, Math Department

In article <C09ppF.KBx@quake.sylmar.ca.us> brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder) writes:
>In article <gaboy.725907423@well.sf.ca.us> gaboy@well.sf.ca.us (Gerald Boyack) writes:
>
>>The only interesting aspect is to try to figure out why so many
>>people clutch at any pseudo-science mysticism concocted by
>>Capra/Penrose ilk.
>
>>To say that the pseudo-science mysticism writers are snake oil
>>salesmen does not answer the question of why so many people, in
>>this day and age of education and information availability, buy
>>the stuff.
>
>I would say that this explains why they are so effectively spread, but it
>doesn't explain why people are attracted.  It's certainly a good point though.
>

For a good, if somewhat Freudian, explanation, see THE NEW NONSENSE 
by Charles M Fair.  His theory is that most people cannot handle 
a secular zeitgeist.  I haven't seen any other books on the subject:  
most skeptical books consist of anecdotes, frothy outrage, and, on 
occastion, financial challenges.

>>As is the case for many questions, there is probably a
>>combination of answers.  There is probably is an element of the
>>need for the mother's breast, and for dreams of power to survive,
>>but I feel that there is also a strong element of anti-science
>>obsession.  Those who do not think deeply believe that the
>>development of the atomic bomb caused the worrisome and expensive
>>cold war, and that the development of pesticides caused all the
>>ills of the body extant, and that the engineers who developed
>>motors caused the oil spills.  Anything that suggests that
>>scientists and engineers are both demonic and stupid has appeal
>>to the unthinking, of whom there are seemingly more than there
>>are homeless people on the news.
>
>I think there's more than a little anti-science and anti-achievement
>sentiment at work here.  If you are a fairly ineffective person (or see
>yourself as essentially pathetic), every scientific discovery, engineering
>achievement, or business success is seen as a slap in the face.  When such
>people are confronted by the obvious evidence that others are bettwe
>in certain ways than they are, the need to deny this is often strongly
>felt.  Ayn Rand called it "Hatred of the good for being the good"...something
>more evil than envy.

There is always a group of unsuccessful people who would tear down 
the society that they resent if given the chance.  These people feel 
that their own lives are unsuccessful, and blame others.  The 
Chinese Red Guard is an example of a group that hated "the good for 
being the good".

But neo-Wagnerians like Rand (sorry, couldn't resist) tend to overlook 
the frequently swinish behavior of the "good".  Example:  in the High 
Middle Ages, when the Church became wealthy and started commissioning 
wars and art, it launched the idea that The Poverty of Christ was 
a blasphemy:  Christ was actually wealthy (the Frankincense invested 
wisely, you know).  The resentful peasants (who were not permitted 
to read subversive works like the Bible) and lower clergy began 
whispering that the "AntiChrist" was in Rome, as a false prophet among 
false Christians.  The Cult of the AntiChrist certainly is an example 
of hating the good for being the good---but also, the good weren't 
really all that good.

Now, imagine that it is nearly a thousand years later, and you work 
45 hrs weekly in a dead-end job with 2 weeks vacation, a half-hr 
commute, declining benefits, and hazardous working conditions.  You 
never had a chance to go to College, and your kids probably won't 
either.  "Good" does not consist of Great Art, it consists of decent 
dental care for the kids and some recognition of one' humanity from 
one's employer (you know, that Malibu State U guy who's read all of 
Rand's books and is subsequently Expressing his Individuality at 
the expense of everyone else).

Of course, like Marlon Brando, you would like to have been among the 
Good, to have been A Contender.  But, like that poor thug in The 
Waterfront, you aren't, and it wasn't your fault, either.  So you 
try to be one, pretend to be one, or take solace in the Bible's 
promise that God watches every sparrow.  Just like people among The 
Good like to believe that their Goodness is a result of their own 
virtue, those not among The Good prefer to believe that their 
unhappy lot is a result of accident, or even malice.  And while The 
Good might deny it vehemently, often it is accident, and occasionally  
even malice.

>
>>I wonder why the modern mysticism muddlers have not organized
>>into some sort of formal religion.  Perhaps they have and I do
>>not know about it.   Anyone know of such a religion?
>
>It's what is loosely called the "new age" movement.  It's sort of a mishmash
>of every kind of irrational and anti-scientific belief.  If you visit one
>of those new age book stores, you'll find the works of people like 
>Capra, Penrose, and their friends displayed prominently.
>
>--Brian

The New Age is really the result of the failure of more, er, 
respectable movements.  The mainstream Churches have become 
largely secular social organizations, investing their time 
in day care or crocquet, depending on the inclinations of the 
ever-shrinking pool of parishioners.  Mainstream science has 
become like the old Holy Roman Empire, with legions of iso-
lated no-where men becoming experts of their own turf---and 
ignorant of the rest of science, not to mention the rest of 
humanity.  And humanity is supposed to accept the revealed 
Word of Top Scientists, with no backtalk.  Backtalk is anti-
intellectual.

So many people look for some place where they belong, some 
movement with some humanity.  The New Age, Christian Funda-
mentalism, Self-Help, (Libertarianism) are all examples of 
new movements that are providing what the Establishment does 
not:  a moral and ontological foundation with some humanity.

-----Greg McColm
--
SHAMELESS AD:  Math PhDs in Analysis, Discrete Math./Th. of Comp., Num. Anal., 
Prob., are invited to apply to the Math. Dept. of Univ. of S. Florida for 
research/teaching positions that may be available: contact K. L. Pothoven at 
mathdept@math.usf.edu. Deadline 2/1/93. USF is a politically correct employer.