WhirledView

Whose Laws?

by CKR

The New York Times today brings us another blast in the ongoing war against science by a small subset of those who call themselves religious. It’s a version of the accusation of “you’re doing it too.” This starts out as a particularly weak argument and proceeds to a fundamental misunderstanding of science.

If what is being done is wrong or procedurally unacceptable, accusing another of doing it too may weaken his case, but it doesn’t bolster one’s own case.

What is alleged is that science an arbitrary belief system, just like religion. The attacker then goes on (he thinks) to show that science (or scientists, not the same thing) is unwilling to examine its assumptions, just like religion. Why someone thinks it is a good thing to be an adherent of an arbitrary belief system that is unwilling to examine its assumptions is beyond me, but that’s in the realm of psychology and I’d rather stay with philosophy.

So let’s look at the claims in the Times article.

All science proceeds on the assumption that nature is ordered in a rational and intelligible way. You couldn’t be a scientist if you thought the universe was a meaningless jumble of odds and ends haphazardly juxtaposed.

…to be a scientist, you had to have faith that the universe is governed by dependable, immutable, absolute, universal, mathematical laws of an unspecified origin.

The idea that the laws exist reasonlessly is deeply anti-rational.

The trouble with these claims is that they have science backwards. It appears that the author was exposed to poor science teachers and never got over it.

Tracking or Not?

by CKR

I'm just wondering how consistent this is with this.

Apparently cell phones can be used to track drug dealers but not those who need 911 help. Or is this another of those governmental myths? We might be able to track people via their cellphones, so we need to press the legal system as far as possible, so that we've kept that legal channel open? And oh by the way we need to say that tracking, like those mythological liquid explosives, really works.

Or is it a regional thing that works better in some places than others? With certain cell phones?

Sound and Fury

by CKR

Harold Brown and John Deutch recently responded to the proposal by George Schultz, William Perry, Henry Kissinger and Sam Nunn in the Wall Street Journal.

Brown has expanded on some of his ideas in a Washington Quarterly article, which differs in detail from the WSJ op-ed, but not by a lot. Brown and Deutch mention “some former officials and presidential aspirants” (or “several former senior foreign policy officials”) who “have called for the adoption of a nuclear weapons–free world as a concrete goal.” No mention who those folks are, nor is their op-ed properly referenced, which seems like a cheap shot and a poor way to begin a responsible dialog.

The main criticism that Brown and Deutch offer is that the goal of eliminating nuclear weapons is “aspirational” and therefore counterproductive. I take this to be an assertion rather than a conclusion, because the arguments presented in its support are thin to none. Nor do they present any specifics for a program, as the earlier authors did.

There are many possible problems with aspirational goals. One is that, if they are not supported properly, they will cause disillusionment. This, as Brown and Deutch admit, is the problem with Article VI of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Such disillusionment might be better met with increased effort toward the goal rather than junking the goal entirely if it is worthwhile, but let that pass for a bit. Another is that aspirational goals can fog the vision of those pressing ahead and cause the enterprise to falter or go in the wrong direction. This, it seems to me, is the more damaging charge, but Brown and Deutch make it only indirectly.

Happy Thanksgiving!

by CKR

I'm thankful for many, many things.

The internet has been a wonderful addition to my life. When I was a child, the father of one of my friends was a ham radio operator. I marveled at the postcards he received from all over the world. Blogging is a bit like that. WhirledView has many readers all over the world. We don't get postcards from them, but StatCounter identifies locations. Some of you generously share your thoughts in the comments, and I've even been lucky enough to sit down across the table from some of you.

So I'll give thanks here for the internet and friends around the world.

Orhan Pamuk’s Other Colors: A Book Review Essay

By PHK

On the jacket of Orhan Pamuk’s latest book, Other Colors: Essays and a Story, stands the black silhouette of a lone man – hands in his pockets, shoulders shrugged, face away from us – walking on top of a rail of the electric tram line that runs down the left lane of a damp, dark empty cobblestone street illuminated only by the fog smeared light of distant street lamps. In the background, two dark gray minarets of a giant mosque pierce the lighter grey sky. The jacket tells us that Ara Güler took this evocative photograph, that Chip Kidd designed the jacket and that Maureen Freely translated the text from Turkish - but nothing more.

On the surface, Other Colors might appear to be a hodge-podge of autobiographical short essays by Pamuk – many, but not all, that had never been published before. But hodge-podge is not a fair description because these essays are as well-ordered and crafted as a carefully designed complex multistoried, multi-use building by a leading international architect.

As such, these essays, in one way or another provide, the back – or back-back stories of several of Pamuk’s previous works. They’re not essential for enjoyment of reading My Name Is Red or Snow, for instance, but for me at least, they answered questions about characters and locations I had previously had, but not found in the novels themselves or in their prefaces. Yet, what I, as a social scientist, found among the most intriguing in Other Colors was Pamuk’s description of the painstaking research – historical, contemporary, familial and societal – that he undertook to ensure the accuracy of the periods, people and physical surroundings of which he wrote. The tales of murder, intrigue, love –emotions and events that drove these post-modernist novels forward – seem almost incidental.

Neither East nor West

Pamuk accurately characterizes himself as a westernized, secular Turk and his political views – whether he likes it or not – under-pin and replicate part of that complicated, multifaceted push-pull relationship between Turkey and Europe described so explicitly and poignantly in Snow and Istanbul.

He points, in Other Colors, to influences from two great Russian writers - Dostoyevsky and Nabokov. Russia’s intellectuals, too, have felt many of the same ambiguities towards Europe as they, like the Turks – over the centuries – have knocked on Europe’s door attracted like moths to its flame only to be repelled by the flame’s searing heat.

Pamuk’s description of his problems with the dark forces in Turkish politics that charged, tried, but then let him off on a technicality for violating the controversial Article 301 of the Turkish penal code are particularly troubling. Who are these people? Why are they so powerful? What are their motives? Who are their supporters? Why should Turkish writers and others be harassed and intimidated for wanting to know and write the truth about the history of a dead empire that preceded their births and that of their country? Are these dark forces among the same people who have apparently begun to monitor Turks’ access to the Internet? What makes them so afraid? I as a Westerner want to know.

The Presidential Candidates on Nuclear Policy - Democrats

by CKR

Continuing my series. I’ve been adding other goodies to my presidential issues page. Check it out.

The Republicans are a pretty sorry bunch on the subject of nuclear policy. Only John McCain looked a little bit serious about it. The Democrats have published more words, but they aren’t very adventurous. There are a number of low-hanging fruit in nuclear policy that could immensely improve the United States’ standing in the world: take missiles off alert, ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, and bring the nuclear numbers down to totals of a few hundred. Those goals have been analyzed and recommended by many national-security specialists, not least George Shultz, William Perry, Henry Kissinger and Sam Nunn in the January 4 Wall Street Journal, followed by Margaret Beckett, in her last days as the UK’s Foreign Secretary.

Espousing these goals would give the Democrats a real marker against what is becoming the War Party, while showing that they are serious about national security. The questions about Pakistan’s nukes shows that nuclear proliferation can hardly be anything but bad for the security of the United States. The United States must lead by cutting its nuclear stockpile down to a safer level. There are hardly a hundred strategic targets for nuclear weapons in the world; that means that 300 nuclear weapons is easily enough for the stockpile.

Something that is not well understood in the United States is that other countries take the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty seriously. Countries without nuclear weapons pledged not to develop them if the countries with nuclear weapons would promise to work toward their elimination. Well, ha ha wink nudge, it turns out that the nuclear weapon states were just a bit cynical about that and just let those other guys put it in to get them to sign up. That’s one justification for not doing more, and it’s at least partly true. But the words are there, in Article VI,

Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.

and the parties signed up to them. There is no major country that intends to make all others bend to its will, unless it’s the United States. Getting rid of the excess nukes would help to convince the rest of the world that that’s not our objective.

The Schultz, Perry, Kissinger and Nunn op-ed isn’t a bad measure by which to look at the Democrats’ proposals.

ZenPundit Dot Com!

by CKR

Our good friend Mark has new digs at ZenPundit.com. Go on over and check it out.

Tuesday Feeder Blogging and Amaryllis Watch

by CKR

I was contemplating using some old photos. They're still not bad, but I went to take an up-to-the-minute amaryllis photo, and I just decided to take a quick look at the feeder. Western flicker, chickadees, house finches, a red-breasted nuthatch. Great! I decided I'd try to press the telephoto a little harder than usual. This was complexified by the wind swinging the feeder, but still not bad. A Steller's jay showed up during the photography session, but stayed in the trees. One of my neighbors, from across the arroyo, told me the other day that he had been seeing them. This is the first one I've seen at my feeder. Ours are much bluer than the one in the linked photo. The first time I saw one was in Yosemite National Park. They superficially look like the eastern bluejays, crest and all, but they're much bigger. Gorgeous.

So here are the nuthatch and one of the chickadees. And the amaryllis.