June 12, 2008
THE (CHINESE) EMPEROR'S OLD CLOTHES
From Edge:
Edge has received notice from the publisher that acquired PRC Chinese language rights to What Is Your Dangerous Idea?: Today's Leading Thinkers on the Unthinkable that the book "can't be published in China because some content is not accordant to Chinese regulations, for example, some content about religious, soul." [sic]
The book, based on an edited selection from The 2006 Edge Question, was published last year in the US (HarperCollins) and the UK (Free Press) as well as a number of foreign-language markets.
"There is a profound issue lurking here," writes Pinker. "Everyone says that China will be the next scientific and economic power. Is this compatible with their ongoing rejection of open debate and exploration of ideas? Is a technologically advanced society compatible with anti-intellectualism and suppression of debate? It's hard to see how China will ever compete with the West as a source of scientific and technological innovation if ideas cannot be discussed and evaluated. Or will the Internet — which can never be completely censored — and a stream of PhDs returning from the West eventually pressure them to open up?"
More here.
Posted by Azra Raza at 04:16 AM | Permalink
Comments
Richard Dawkins asks "I wonder whether, sixty years after Hitler's death, we might at least venture to ask what is the moral difference between breeding for musical ability, and forcing a child to take music lessons"
The idea of breeding humans for certain skills is repugnant mainly because it would turn a human child into a tool rather than a free agent. I am a parent "forcing" my child to take piano lessons. This is not because we want him to become a musician. He also takes painting, swimming and Chinese lessons. We want him to be balanced and well-rounded, not highly specialized. Selective breeding would also imply that men and women be "assigned" to each other in order to breed. This would not seem to be compatible with normal notions of human freedom. The broader question of whether we should be manipulating plants and animals to the extent that we do for our purposes is a good one. Do we have the moral right to breed cows for every increasing milk yields at the expense of their overall health? Probably not, but this is more defensible than human genetic engineering.
Posted by: Jared | Jun 12, 2008 11:58:44 AM
Jared, always right! Richard Dawkins, in his photo, looks sad and angry --- may be it's me who, used to rely on how people look, thinks he does.
Think and speak no evil... So, I'll shutup!
Just a thought to share with you...
Good cheers!
Posted by: Felix E F Larocca MD | Jun 12, 2008 2:56:40 PM
Felix,
You always agree with me, which shows you must be very intelligent. Actually, I'm not at all smart but I have a little common sense. Hope all's well in the DR.
I think Pinker looks sadder and angrier than Dawkins.
Posted by: Jared | Jun 12, 2008 3:26:02 PM
Nice, balmy and breezy. Calm seas and pleasant weather...
Best to you!
Posted by: Felix E F Larocca MD | Jun 12, 2008 3:45:28 PM
How long do you think Pinker will keep the fro?
Posted by: blah | Jun 12, 2008 5:30:04 PM
Speaking of the Emperor, his clothes, and Dawkins---
"I have considered the impudent accusations of Mr Dawkins with exasperation at his lack of serious scholarship. He has apparently not read the detailed discourses of Count Roderigo of Seville on the exquisite and exotic leathers of the Emperor's boots, nor does he give a moment's consideration to Bellini's masterwork, On the Luminescence of the Emperor's Feathered Hat. We have entire schools dedicated to writing learned treatises on the beauty of the Emperor's raiment, and every major newspaper runs a section dedicated to imperial fashion; Dawkins cavalierly dismisses them all. He even laughs at the highly popular and most persuasive arguments of his fellow countryman, Lord D. T. Mawkscribbler, who famously pointed out that the Emperor would not wear common cotton, nor uncomfortable polyester, but must, I say must, wear undergarments of the finest silk.
Dawkins arrogantly ignores all these deep philosophical ponderings to crudely accuse the Emperor of nudity.
Personally, I suspect that perhaps the Emperor might not be fully clothed — how else to explain the apparent sloth of the staff at the palace laundry — but, well, everyone else does seem to go on about his clothes, and this Dawkins fellow is such a rude upstart who lacks the wit of my elegant circumlocutions, that, while unable to deal with the substance of his accusations, I should at least chide him for his very bad form.
Until Dawkins has trained in the shops of Paris and Milan, until he has learned to tell the difference between a ruffled flounce and a puffy pantaloon, we should all pretend he has not spoken out against the Emperor's taste. His training in biology may give him the ability to recognize dangling genitalia when he sees it, but it has not taught him the proper appreciation of Imaginary Fabrics."
(From Meyers)
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Jun 13, 2008 11:51:38 PM
Post a comment