Expand Quote
so i listened to the demystifysci podcast interview with jack kruse and that is a complete rabbit hole. thanks for sharing.
the TLDW (in my words): biology should be studied through the framework of solid state physics or else the systems are fundamentally misinterpreted and will never be properly understood.
a couple take aways.
i might have to change the quote at the bottom of my posts to “what the heck is rick rubin doing at the center of this biology conversation?”
kruse’s issue with centralized science reminded me of the book “rhetorical darwinism”, which does a good job of exploring how western science has huge blind spots that are introduced by the human need to set up and follow belief systems. the author is coming from a religious studies angle, but they draw from a similar range of issues as kruse.
please note that I'm not challenging any of this and haven't listened to the pod. I am curious and ask that you clarify what's going on in the bolded statement vis a vis Western Science v Western Religion, Western Science v Older/Other Sciences, Western Science v Non-Western Religion, Western Science as an objective system based on proving various hypothesis v Western Science as as a belief system.
IUTSM, for what it is worth, i was thinking about your question, my original statement and my initial response. my statement about gaps in western science was very poorly worded at best, and my response was also maybe me misinterpreting what needed to be clarified.
so, to take a stab at rewording what i meant about rhetorical darwinism: there are shortcomings in the public’s understanding about what science has proven and can prove, and in western culture, science has also become some what of a belief system, often based on popular misconceptions of the facts.
regarding how any of this relates to jack kruse, it is totally tangential. kruse conspiratorially claims that the u.s. government has systematically stifled research on the photoelectric effect within the body and this has lead generations of biologist into a myopic approach to the physical systems being studied in their field. he’s a real firecracker. the connection, however thin, would be people thinking they understand the science, when really they are satisfied working with a generalized version of it because it suites their needs.