It is as if the Enlightenment never happened.

Posted by Les on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 at 09:37 AM. Read 826 times. Tags:
{name} pic

Francis Wheen over at the L.A. Times has a great little rant on how modern Americans tend to be an overly credulous lot incapable of reasoning their way out of a wet paper bag. There’s nothing said that I’ve not said a hundred times myself, but it’s said well and worth a read.

When Reason Sleeps, Mumbo-Jumbo Frolics

Over the last 25 years or so, after two centuries of gradual ascendancy, Enlightenment values of reason, secularism and scientific empiricism have come under fierce assault from a grotesquely incongruous coalition of radical deconstructionists and medieval flat-earthers, New Age mystics and Old Testament fundamentalists.

The space vacated by notions of history and progress has been colonized by cults, quackery, gurus, irrational panics, moral confusion and an epidemic of gibberish. A Gallup poll in 1993, for example, found that only 11% of Americans accepted the standard scientific account of evolution, whereas 47% maintained that “God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so.” Another poll revealed that 49% of Americans believed in demonic possession, 36% in telepathy and 25% in astrology. It is as if the Enlightenment never happened.

There have been astonishing scientific advances in the last quarter-century, exemplified by the creation of the Internet and the mapping of the human genome. In spite of this — or, more likely, because of it — millions of Westerners now seek consolation from mumbo-jumbo merchants and snake-oil vendors.

Alas these days I feel that folks like us are just howling into the wind for all the good it does. Yet I keep on howling just the same.

Comments:

Page 2 of 2 pages  <  1 2

decrepitoldfool United States Posted on 05/27/2004 at 01:20 PM

decrepitoldfool pic

PopTarts, good catch on the poem thing. (posted while I was writing my previous post!) “Facts in dispute!” I hereby press the “pause” button on my comments about the New Mexico incident. 

Two of my kids were disciplined from time to time over the years in public schools for saying things the principals didn’t like.  It’s always bothered me that schools have to be “speech free” zones… or do they?

Pop Tarts United States Posted on 05/27/2004 at 02:09 PM

Pop Tarts pic

Little more digging. Nothing much to report except:

The facts that seem to be in agreement between both parties are:
1) Bill(William) Nevins contract not renewed.
2) “Anti-war” poem was read out by a girl Courtney. And there was a complaint.
3) “Pro-war” poem read out by principal.
4) Courtney’s poem was read by the school administrators as a result of the initial incident.
5) The “Poem club” is no longer around.

On a general level, it would seem that if freedom of speech allows for anti-war poem, then pro-war poem should also be allowed. Although some people could find fault with regards to the audience or reach of each poem.

The ‘poem club’ apparently was created or brought back by Bill Nevins and the question is whether does his departure mean that the club have to close down. Was there no suitable replacement?

It would thus seem that the issue falls on the employment of Bill Nevins as Courtney is not a party to the litigation. Some more conspiracy bound minds might of course think that Courtney is made not to complain since her parent works for the school and the way the school treated Bill Nevins was a warning to Courtney’s parent or Courtney herself. One may also claim that even the mere asking of Courtney to show them the poem, however nicely they phrased, is an attempt to warn her. But that seems less credible if you think about it, as the school have to investigate when a complaint is made. And it seems that after the investigation, Courtney was vindicated.

There is a Bill Nevins suing the Rio Rancho school that is for sure. And that the case is now sent to Federal courts. Furthermore, it would seem that the ACLU is not representing Bill Nevins but the website which I posted above is run by the people representing Bill Nevins. That much from the court filling below.
------
NEVINS W VS RIO RANCHO ET AL

-- Case Detail --
Case #:  D-202-CV-200306305
Current Judge:  DIVISION EIGHTEEN
Case Status:  CL FINAL CLOSED Status Date: 10/06/2003
Filing Date:  09/15/2003
Court:  Albuquerque District Court

-- Parties to this Case --
DEFENDANT D 1 RIO RANCHO PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ

DEFENDANT D 2 TRIPP GARY
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ

DEFENDANT D 3 TRIPP GARY
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ

DEFENDANT D 4 PASS ELL SUE
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ

DEFENDANT D 5 PASS ELL SUE
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ

DEFENDANT D 6 CLEVELAND SUE
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ

DEFENDANT D 7 CLEVELAND SUE
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ

PLAINTIFF P 1 NEVINS WILLIAM
Attorney(s):  ERIC SIROTKIN

-- Register of Actions Activity --
Event Date Event Description P Type P Num Amt
10/06/2003 CLS: REMOVAL TO FED COURT
FILING NOTICE TO ADVERSE PARTY OF REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT
(DFS)

10/01/2003 JDG: JUDGE ASSIGN ROTATION

09/15/2003 SUMMONS ISSUED

09/15/2003 OPN: COMPLAINT
FILING COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

09/15/2003 ASM: JURY 6 PERSON P 1 100.00
FILING JURY DEMAND, $100.00 FEE PAID (PL)

09/15/2003 ASM: CIVIL FILING W/ ARBITRAT P 1 122.00

-- Judge Assignment History --
Assign Date Judge Name Sequence # Assignment Event Desc
09/15/2003 SUSAN M CONWAY 1
10/01/2003 DIVISION EIGHTEEN 2 JDG: JUDGE ASSIGN ROTATION

-- Civil Complaints --
09/15/2003 1 OPN: COMPLAINT 3 10/06/2003 TRANSFERRED
Parties to this Complaint:
RIO RANCHO PUBLIC SCHOOLS D - 1
TRIPP GARY D - 2
TRIPP GARY D - 3
PASS ELL SUE D - 4
PASS ELL SUE D - 5
CLEVELAND SUE D - 6
CLEVELAND SUE D - 7
NEVINS WILLIAM P - 1
Causes of Action:
1 - OTHER DAMAGES

Pop Tarts United States Posted on 05/27/2004 at 02:18 PM

Pop Tarts pic

Opps, sorry, cancel point number 5.

I am not too sure whether the “Poem club” is or is not around. And there is a dispute at least based on the article and the response.

VernR United States Posted on 05/27/2004 at 08:18 PM

VernR pic

Actually, it was better than a good catch.

I received the article in an email and only verified that it acually appeared in a news paper. I guess a clue that I should have seen was that the journalist was reporting on a friend.

PT you did a better job in checking sources than the reporter. That last statement points back to something that I want to get into a bit in the main topic.

Page 2 of 2 pages  <  1 2

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys


Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: A 3D CSS Box Model.

Previous entry: Not a bad start.

<< Back to main