Raphael Sassower

Postmodernism and Philosophy of Science A Critical Engagement

This essay examines critically two related claims: first, that postmodernism and philosophy of science depend on each other in a manner similar to the Enlightenment and Romanticism, that is, they respond and dispute each others claims; and second, that what underlies and emanates from both postmodernism and philosophy of science is a political perspective and commitment. These claims suggest not only the possibility of translating from one area to the other when they are critically engaged with each other but also the potential for using both areas simultaneously to transform and possibly improve the human condition. By emphasizing the similarities between science/philosophy of science and postmodernism the essay explores the ways in which these two enterprises or groups of people can learn from one another and benefit from each others insight.

Review Essay: Is Homo Economics Extinct?

The classical view of “rational man” as the unit of analysis for economic behavior and marketplace exchange has been changed by the late twentieth century with the help of behavioral economics that considers predictable irrationality as a normal mode of behavior. Instead of revising neoclassical economics to fit contemporary economic crises, it is recommended to follow Adam Smiths original concerns for the social setting of individual behavior and to treat economic crises with pragmatic flexibility rather than with dogmatic ideology.

Ideology Masked as Science: Shielding Economics from Criticism

Parading economic theories as scientific formulations may be justified for reasons of rigor, allowing them to be empirically tested and revised accordingly. Yet there are other reasons, by now so entrenched that we may fail to notice them. Having acquired a preferred status in our midst, scientific formulations face less fundamental challenges than theoretical ones. Criticism may be leveled against this or that particular formulation, yet, however severe the criticism, it still remains limited to a narrow apparatus. The criticism remains internal to the economic endeavor and thereby avoids the potentially devastating results that await any intellectual endeavor exposed to unrestrained criticism. A relevant, yet external, view of economics can be forwarded through the philosophy of science. Taking into account Imre Lakatoss model of the philosophy and practice of science, the views of Paul Feyerabend and Joseph Agassi on the politics of science, and the sociological postulates concerning science of Thomas Kuhn, one would be in a position to make some general remarks on the context in which science operates today. This exercise is needed for the evaluation of allegedly scientific economic theories. Since the views of philosophers of science overwhelm contemporary discussions about the methodology of economics and its sci-

The Alarmist View of Technology

Individuals and institutions can adopt either a collective technophobia and attempt to ignore or to minimize their use of technology, or they can adopt a technophilia and enthusiastically maximize their dependence on and support of technology without any concern for important risk factors.1 Between these two extreme responses to technology there is a third possibility that attempts to achieve some equilibrium, accounting for the problems associated with technology without thereby condemning technology as a whole. The third option expects to optimize the advantages technology has to offer, while keeping under control most of the potential drawbacks associated with technology.2

Whose patient is this, anyway?

A twelve-year-old boy suffering from septic arthritis/osteomyelitis (an infection of the bone and joint) was brought to the emergency room of a Boston teaching hospital late one evening. Since the child was not directly referred by a physician or clinic, the parents were asked where the child received his routine medical care. They said that though they did not have or remember a specific provider, they previously received care for themselves and their children at the local neighborhood health center. Because their son had not

Ethical Choices in Contemporary Medicine: Integrative Bioethics

Introduction 1. The predicaments of contemporary medicine 2. Medical epistemologies and goals 3. Medical certainty revisited 4. A new ethics of medical practice Bibliography Index

Responsible technoscience: the haunting reality of Auschwitz and Hiroshima.

Auschwitz and Hiroshima stand out as two realities whose uniqueness must be reconciled with their inevitability as outcomes of highly rationalized processes of technoscientific progress. Contrary to Michael Walzer’s notion of “double effect”, whereby unintended consequences and the particular uses to which warfare may lead remain outside the moral purview of scientists, this paper endorses the commitment of the Society for Social Responsibility in Science to argue that members of the technoscientific community are always responsible for their work and the eventual uses made of it. In what follows four related views are outlined pertaining to modern situations within which the technoscientific community operates, so as to highlight the urgency of infusing a sense of responsibility for the products of their activities into this community. A provisional “code” is suggested that may serve as a guide for increased personal responsibility of individual technoscientists (academic scientists and industrial engineers).

Technoscience and Medicine

In an age that reconstructs itself historically and that attempts to deal with a postmodern condition in Lyotard’s sense [8], one would expect a recurrent interest in the scientific credibility of all areas of research and practice. If science is to mean anything special at all, one could argue, then it must distinguish itself from all other discourses and deliver highly valued “goods” in an unqualified manner. In short, the reliance that can be expected of science and its attendant technologies surpasses in principle and in practice all other forms of expression generated culturally, from the film industry to religions. The privilege granted science and technology is a modem phenomenon, one that can be traced to the vision of the Enlightenment, where reason and empirical experimentation were joined to apprehend diverse data and cull specific results and predictions to protect and improve the human condition. The scientific revolutions that began in the seventeenth century transformed not only the intellectual arena, but also the broad cultural expectations of the eighteenth to the twentieth centuries. To a certain extent, and without disregard for numerous challenges —Romantic and Marxist — to the validity of science and its methods of inquiry, contemporary society remains enchanted and captivated by the great promises of the scientific era (especially since many of these great promises have been fulfilled, such as longer life expectancy, efficiency in food production, improved transportation, and communication techniques).

Therapeutic moments in technology assessment

Abstract The following essay suggests a shift in emphasis from traditional modes of technology assessment to therapeutic ones. This shift in emphasis parallels to some extent the shift from technology assessment, a quantitative analysis of “facts”—to integrated impact assessment, a qualitative interpretation of a multiplicity of expressions concerning these same “facts.” By introducing therapeutic moments into the discourse of assessment, this essay suggests approaching the popular media and artistic artifacts as possible “applications” of therapeutic techniques usually confined to clinical sessions. As such, therapeutic moments may be as informative as “scientific” reports by experts.

Medical education: The training of ethical physicians

This paper suggests that medical education be revised to assist in diffusing potential ethical dilemmas that arise during health care provision. A revised medical education would emphasize the role of the humanities in the training of physicians, especially in light of recent critiques of the canonical scientific model in general, and more specifically in the use of that model for medical training and practice.