Epistemophobia

The title means fear of knowledge. I actually had to look it up, though the roots should have made it obvious. Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that deals with the study of knowledge, what can be known, what can be learned, and the extent of knowledge. It was never my favorite branch of philosophy, but the root words are the same. The reason I didn't enjoy epistemology was because I could not stand the idea that there were limits on what people can know. There are limits to what science can reveal, but like metaphysics, epistemology seems to belong more in the realm of science. When knowledge is seen to be limited, then limits are placed on humanity's ability to better itself. Knowledge of something does not mean action.

But after that slight devolution, I return to the main topic of this blog, the fear of knowledge. This is the third or fourth time I've tried to write about this subject, hopefully this one won't get ruined, lost or interrupted. The fear of knowledge is the root of every other problem that faces this country. Both the left and the right face a stark fear of learning that paralyzes both. The fear of learning and knowledge comes from different angles, and about completely different subjects, the root of the problem is still ignorance and fear. The changes in the education system contribute to this problem by not encouraging expansion of learning, but rather a narrow set of standards that must be adhered to. Teaching in preparation for multiple choice tests does not lead to students learning, it may lead to higher test scores, but not to students actually learning. When schools don't teach, the colleges are forced to either dumb down their curriculum, or start by teaching things that students should already have learned. This leads to a retardation and the dumbing down of college degrees.

The right wing fears science. They hide behind religion and foolish notions that denying science makes it untrue. Right wingers and their followers use blind faith to mask a fear that they have of their world view being wrong. They grow in power and their fear dominates their thought. They use ignorance as a basis for power. Occasionally one will try to doctor belief up in the mask of science, but they are completely lacking in any credibility when it comes to this. Evolution is their biggest fear, followed by physics, astronomy, and anything that challenges their extremely narrow world view.

The other area where right wing thought fails is economics. Libertarians who aren't afraid of science, like most right wingers, hide behind free market economics as the fix all for problems of all sorts. Their problem comes when they seek to deny the knowledge that Smith's free market was based on a false assumption. The founding principle of the free market is that people will act in their own best interest. As society has advanced, this has become less and less true. They may act in what they think is their own best interest, but in modern society that has developed into actions based on greed. The bank collapses of the past year, the stock market crashes, everything points not to acting from thought out, long term self interest, but from short term greed. There is a major denial in this from so many directions that I can't even begin to name them all. But that is what facts show, to deny this knowledge is equivalent to denying that the sun rises every morning.

From the left the most obvious fear is the fear that Democrats are seen as having of firearms. So much fear is spread by left wingers who see them as the root of evil and their proliferation as a sign of nothing good. A lot of these people have never handled a gun, I would bet even that many have never seen one up close. Yet they are struck by an irrational fear of something they know very very little about. And instead of promoting a course of knowledge, they prefer to fear monger and try to ban a constitutionally protected right. This fear is pure foolishness, at least as much as the right wing denying evolution. The right doesn't do much to correct this problem though, they hide behind racism and the idea of privileged knowledge which is just as bad as ignorance. The much more educated approach would be admitting that first people are going to own guns. It's a part of the fabric of America. That people need to be educated on the proper handling of firearms and that that should be as ingrained as the right to bear arms. And that education should be extended to all, so that none may claim naiveté.

Societies live and fall by the limits they put on things. Rome fell because they failed to acknowledge their dealings with the "barbarians" made the barbarians stronger and more educated. The Dark Ages gave light to the Renaissance when people dared challenge orthodoxy. The Enlightenment was an extension of this denial of belief with reason. The world stands at a crossroads now. Education and knowledge could propel humanity to great heights, or fear of knowledge and the unknown can haul the world back into a distopia of ignorance and inequality unequaled in history.

There are those that would say that I'm a foolish optimist for hoping that humanity could embrace knowledge when ignorance is easier. It could be true, but I would rather be optimistic about this than right and cynical. Hope in the greatness of humanity is the anchor I tie myself to. It's to much nicer than the alternative. I might be guilty of the same thing I accuse others of, denying knowledge that is evident, but the jury is still out on this one.

Book Review: An Echo in the Bone

Alright, trying to figure out where to start on this one really. Just wow. How to review without spoiling and giving away anything...and still not sound like a blathering idiot. Maybe the simplest thing to do would be to say that this is my favorite book in the series since Dragonfly in Amber? It is amazing and kept me on my toes the whole time. There were some parts that were foreseeable, but that's to be expected when dealing with historical events. But the parts of the personal interactiong of characters, could see the conflict coming, but most of the time she took it in a different direction that was expected.

There were some parts, especially near the end that did seem a bit forced. Characters seemed a bit pushed into holes they didn't quite fit in, and some of the relationship stuff seemed a bit soap operaish. But this is a very very minor complaint. The rest of the book was amazing. The research that Gabaldon puts in is beyond words fantastic. So much historical accuracy, but told in ways that make it nailbiting and fun beyond words to read.

It was a bit hard to follow at first as well. Alot of skiping around, people in different places, at different times, and the same time, working in the same direction. And alot of perviously minor characters from several books ago coming back with new importance. But I will admit, this could just be because it has been a while since I've read the series, and that could just be a personal thing. But the way that Gabaldon does the jumping around in this book is much more fluid than when she was doing it in Voyager. It just seemed less random, and not as cliched as some parts of Voyager.

Alright, not sure I can go on much more without sounding completely idiotic. Go read this book. I loved it. After a bit of a slump in the last book, Gabaldon is back on form in this one.