In 2023, the SERRC published 131 posts. The most substantive work—replies, responses, reviews, articles, interviews, essays—one can access through our listing of monthly issues—and by browsing our Site Bibliography. … [please read below the rest of the article].
Image credit: Hervé Simon via Flickr / Creative Commons
My continued thanks to our contributors who make good on the promise of fruitfully engaging the scholarly work of others. Through freely accessible, thoughtful dialogue we show our commitment to learning and knowledge. The academy’s suffocating demand to overproduce work credited as one’s own, often absent any further engagement (beyond tallying) after publication, underscores the worth of the time taken to address seriously others’ work. Further, in pursuing the logic of making all academic efforts “count”, dialogue or commentary tends to be reserved for the work of elite or canonical figures. I deeply appreciate the efforts of the SERRC’s contributors to make visible the many, frequently ignored, facets of scholarly work.
I selected the following pieces as emblematic of issues of concern to our readers in 2023, and in keeping with the broader ethos of the SERRC.
❧ Ahmed Bouzid contacted two dozen philosophy professors, representing a wide variety of colleges and universities in the United States, about the arrival of ChatGPT on campus. Bouzid posed the following question to many of them: “Is ChatGPT a threat to academia?” This timely exchange on ChatGPT garnered a great deal of interest among our readers. Please read Part I and Part II of “24 Philosophy Professors React to ChatGPT’s Arrival.”
❧ Of course, AI will continue to have a hold on our imagination in the coming years. Felipe Figueroa’s review of Evgeny Morozov’s The Santiago Boys and Project Cybersyn—“ … a Chilean project from 1971 to 1973 during the presidency of Salvador Allende aimed at constructing a distributed decision support system to aid in the management of the national economy” (Wikipedia)—offers a fascinating look into the use of information technologies in monitoring and shaping the marketplace and in creating a cybernetic society.
❧ Ljiljana Radenovic speaks to spiritual matters in powerful articles and essays that weave together discerning observations on aspects of her faith with sharp analyses of the history and philosophy of scientific thought. In “Alternative Modernity and Its Discontents”, Radenovic explores and questions how, and whether, Francis Bacon’s trial-and-error methodology, which resides at the heart of modern science, must result in a disenchanted and spiritually impoverished world. Perhaps, as Professor Radenovic asks us to consider, the progress attributed to Bacon’s method does not require us to leave behind our souls.
❧ Brian Martin also asks us—and scientists in particular—to think and research beyond the material world. Martin’s “Postmaterialism, Anyone?” takes up the issues posed by “Spiritually Transformative Experiences”—an experience of overwhelming significance and impact—on scientists and academics. Such experiences tend to be ignored or deemed inappropriate for scientific investigation. Might the default materialism of science rob us of valuable avenue of research? Or, should we be more concerned in the potential of harnessing and exploiting consciousness for commercial ends?
❧ Matthew J. Brown’s “Good Science is Communist: A Reply to Bright and Heesen” analyzes the arguments made in Liam Kofi Bright and Remco Heesen’s “To Be Scientific Is To Be Communist” in Social Epistemology. Brown and Daniel J. Dunleavy in “Is Academic Research Sufficiently Communist? A Comment on Bright and Heesen” not only take up the issues of commercial research in science in relation to Robert Merton’s norm of “communism”, but also demonstrate what the SERRC does best—put ideas into dialogue.
❧ Lee Basham’s “Review: Daisy B. Herndon’s American Nuclear Deception, Why the Port Chicago Experiment Must be Investigated” continues work related to the philosophy of conspiracy theories—a prominent line of inquiry on the SERRC. Basham and Kurtis Hagen, for example, are part of a dedicated group of thinkers resolutely examining where knowledge resides and who gets access to it—especially when one invokes the appellation of “conspiracy theory”. Basham and Hagen challenge our all too ready assumptions and understanding of what constitutes a conspiracy, how expertise works, and why one might rightly hold beliefs that others deem outlandish.
❧ Mark West’s “Review: John Troyer’s Technologies of the Human Corpse” also takes up topics that appear regularly on the SERRC—death and dead bodies. Death remains, at once, a uniquely personal and utterly shared experience. The technologies developed involving dead bodies have existed in more and less sophisticated forms since humans became self-aware. West brings Jacques Derrida’s ideas on death to bear on Troyer’s exploration of modern embalming techniques and advertising in the affecting case of “Bisga Man”.
❧ Katia Vavova’s “Open-Mindedness, Rational Confidence, and Belief Change” specifically addresses Jeremy Fantl’s “Fake News vs. Echo Chambers” (2021) while exploring current issues of open- and closed- mindedness in the midst of the fake news and bullshit we confront ceaselessly in our complex and unpredictable information landscape. Vavova examines how we might refine our bullshit detector; thus, our ability to detect “epistemically questionable” claims while maintaining stable, rational beliefs. Fantl continues and extends the dialogue in examining “how to equip students and ourselves generally to respond well to potentially misleading counterevidence.” Doing so, one might suggest, takes a willingness to practice open scholarly exchanges to distill further our arguments, beliefs, and knowledge.
We realize knowledge together.
Categories: Comments
I for one would like to express my appreciation for this open space and for all the good work that Jim Collier and his team have and continue to put in to keep this forum alive and thriving. All the best to all in 2024.
Thanks Ahmed. Please know how much I appreciate your engagement with the SERRC— especially during these perilous times. The best to us all.
✌️