rigorousintuition.ca

Abraham Ortelius (Ortelius 1596), Theodor Christoph Lilienthal (1756), Alexander von Humboldt (1801 and 1845) Antonio Snider-Pellegrini (Snider-Pellegrini 1858), and others had noted earlier that the shapes of continents on opposite sides of the Atlantic Ocean (most notably, Africa and South America) seem to fit together. W. J. Kious described Ortelius' thoughts in this way:
Abraham Ortelius in his work Thesaurus Geographicus ... suggested that the Americas were "torn away from Europe and Africa ... by earthquakes and floods" and went on to say: "The vestiges of the rupture reveal themselves, if someone brings forward a map of the world and considers carefully the coasts of the three [continents]."

......

David Attenborough, who attended university in the second half of the 1940s, recounted an incident illustrating its lack of acceptance then: "I once asked one of my lecturers why he was not talking to us about continental drift and I was told, sneeringly, that if I could I prove there was a force that could move continents, then he might think about it. The idea was moonshine, I was informed."

Rationality and Irrationality of Continental Drift Worthy of Pursuit

Ever since the revolution in the earth sciences culminated in the overall ac-ceptance of the theory of plate tectonics, philosophers and historians of sciencehave been analyzing this shift in geology. What made the development in ge-ology very interesting is its specific dynamics. Even though the hypothesis of continental drift was proposed by Alfred Wegener already around the 1920s, itwas firmly rejected by many geologists not only as unacceptable but even asunworthy of further pursuit. Almost half a century had to pass in order for thishypothesis to become finally accepted and elaborated into the theory of platetectonics. Such a development inspired discussions among philosophers and his-torians of science, which especially focused around two issues: first, the natureof the revolution in geology and the applicability of different methodologicalframeworks to it, and second, the rationality or irrationality of the stances of scientists throughout the revolution.With regard to the first question, some philosophers and historians of scienceargued that this episode can be described in terms of Kuhn’s notion of scientificrevolution (e.g. Stewart (1990)). However, the majority of them agreed thatLaudan’s account of progress of science is more suitable for this case-study (seee.g. Le Grand (1988), Frankel (1979), Laudan (1987)). The aptness of Laudan’sframework stems from two important notions in his account. On the one hand,his notion of a research tradition as a broader theoretical framework, constitutedby specific scientific theories, has been shown useful for capturing the rivalingcamps in geology, neither of which could be reduced to one generally acceptedtheory.
1
On the other hand, his distinction between the context of pursuit andthe context of acceptance (Laudan, 1977, p. 108-110) proved to be importantfor analyzing questions of rationality regarding this case study. According toLaudan, “acceptance, rejection, pursuit and non-pursuit constitute the majorcognitive stances which scientists can legitimately take towards research tradi-tions (and their constituent theories)” (Laudan, 1977, p. 119). As the namessuggest, the context of acceptance deals with the question as to whether acertain theory is to be accepted as the standard in the given field, while thecontext of pursuit deals with the question as to whether a (possibly young, un-developed) theory is at all worthy of further pursuit. Such a distinction allowsfor a twofold analysis of the rationality of judgments made by geologists duringthis time. This brings us to the second important topic that attracted interestsof philosophers and historians of science, as we have mentioned above.

justdrew » Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:47 am wrote:I think the possibilities are good. but is it research or narrative construction that is needed? Research is always subject to re-interpretation, limited information, total lack of data, fake data, etc...

There are already vast amounts of probably accurate research long done, synthesis and collecting it together may be more urgent.

Also:
1. a plan to put this info before "the unwashed masses"
2. the need for a banner to rally behind
3. implementation activities

jakell » Fri Feb 21, 2014 11:22 am wrote:Differing approaches are valuable, and the quest for the perfect one** means throwing many babies out with the bathwater.

My own...... Start from a narrow base, ie real word events and as current as possible, and build carefully from there. If no real world events fit the desired narrative, don't invent and confabulate, find something more constructive to do.
Don't let the tail wag the dog.


**This is usually fed by the assumption that there must be one overarching conspiracy to rule them all, and this is hinted at in the title here.

American Dream » 21 Feb 2014 09:56 wrote:It is a passion of mine to investigate and expose real conspiracies through investigations that can be backed by strong evidence, investigations that have the potential to seriously benefit our lives through significantly advancing our collective liberation. I think there is great power in researchers with shared values and shared interests working together on shared goals.

Fundamental to this process is a solid critique of White Supremacy, Patriarchy, Capitalism, Homophobia and all the other "isms". Folks that I can think of that are veering in this direction include Tom Burghardt, Peter Dale Scott, Jeffrey Kaye, maybe Robin Ramsay (I never subscribed to Lobster)- and perhaps others, too.

Given the criticism of "conspiracy theories" by structuralist-oriented leftists such as Noam Chomsky, who write it all off due to an overblown "Right Woos Left" kind of thesis, I think we need to develop Conspiracy Theory (with a capital "T") that is solidly anti-fascist, anti-racist, anti-authoritarian, anti-misogynist and also intelligently thought out.

What are the possibilities for helping make that happen more, here at Rigorous Intuition?

FourthBase » Fri Feb 21, 2014 1:49 pm wrote:

American Dream » 21 Feb 2014 09:56 wrote:It is a passion of mine to investigate and expose real conspiracies through investigations that can be backed by strong evidence, investigations that have the potential to seriously benefit our lives through significantly advancing our collective liberation. I think there is great power in researchers with shared values and shared interests working together on shared goals.

Fundamental to this process is a solid critique of White Supremacy, Patriarchy, Capitalism, Homophobia and all the other "isms". Folks that I can think of that are veering in this direction include Tom Burghardt, Peter Dale Scott, Jeffrey Kaye, maybe Robin Ramsay (I never subscribed to Lobster)- and perhaps others, too.

Given the criticism of "conspiracy theories" by structuralist-oriented leftists such as Noam Chomsky, who write it all off due to an overblown "Right Woos Left" kind of thesis, I think we need to develop Conspiracy Theory (with a capital "T") that is solidly anti-fascist, anti-racist, anti-authoritarian, anti-misogynist and also intelligently thought out.

What are the possibilities for helping make that happen more, here at Rigorous Intuition?

I vote for also having a solid critique of anti-capitalism, feminism, antiracism, queer theory, and the anti-fascist milieu in general. Us, too, basically. I propose that a solid critique of ourselves is also fundamental to investigation and liberation. Or did that kind of thing go out of style on the radical left? Or perhaps some folks are blinded by bias to their own blind spots, deaf to their own tone-deaf hypocrisy?

Let's investigate EVERYTHING.

Or are you willing to say "NTSHMA" to pretty much anything that doesn't confirm your own POV?

American Dream » Fri Feb 21, 2014 2:56 pm wrote:It is a passion of mine to investigate and expose real conspiracies through investigations that can be backed by strong evidence, investigations that have the potential to seriously benefit our lives through significantly advancing our collective liberation.

American Dream » Fri Feb 21, 2014 2:56 pm wrote:I think there is great power in researchers with shared values and shared interests working together on shared goals.

American Dream » Fri Feb 21, 2014 2:56 pm wrote:Fundamental to this process is a solid critique of White Supremacy, Patriarchy, Capitalism, Homophobia and all the other "isms".

American Dream » Fri Feb 21, 2014 2:56 pm wrote:Folks that I can think of that are veering in this direction include Tom Burghardt, Peter Dale Scott, Jeffrey Kaye, maybe Robin Ramsay (I never subscribed to Lobster)- and perhaps others, too.

American Dream » Fri Feb 21, 2014 2:56 pm wrote:Given the criticism of "conspiracy theories" by structuralist-oriented leftists such as Noam Chomsky, who write it all off due to an overblown "Right Woos Left" kind of thesis, I think we need to develop Conspiracy Theory (with a capital "T") that is solidly anti-fascist, anti-racist, anti-authoritarian, anti-misogynist and also intelligently thought out.

American Dream » Fri Feb 21, 2014 2:56 pm wrote:What are the possibilities for helping make that happen more, here at Rigorous Intuition?

FourthBase » Fri Feb 21, 2014 6:49 pm wrote:

American Dream » 21 Feb 2014 09:56 wrote:It is a passion of mine to investigate and expose real conspiracies through investigations that can be backed by strong evidence, investigations that have the potential to seriously benefit our lives through significantly advancing our collective liberation. I think there is great power in researchers with shared values and shared interests working together on shared goals.

Fundamental to this process is a solid critique of White Supremacy, Patriarchy, Capitalism, Homophobia and all the other "isms". Folks that I can think of that are veering in this direction include Tom Burghardt, Peter Dale Scott, Jeffrey Kaye, maybe Robin Ramsay (I never subscribed to Lobster)- and perhaps others, too.

Given the criticism of "conspiracy theories" by structuralist-oriented leftists such as Noam Chomsky, who write it all off due to an overblown "Right Woos Left" kind of thesis, I think we need to develop Conspiracy Theory (with a capital "T") that is solidly anti-fascist, anti-racist, anti-authoritarian, anti-misogynist and also intelligently thought out.

What are the possibilities for helping make that happen more, here at Rigorous Intuition?

I vote for also having a solid critique of anti-capitalism, feminism, antiracism, queer theory, and the anti-fascist milieu in general. Us, too, basically. I propose that a solid critique of ourselves is also fundamental to investigation and liberation. Or did that kind of thing go out of style on the radical left? Or perhaps some folks are blinded by bias to their own blind spots, deaf to their own tone-deaf hypocrisy?

Let's investigate EVERYTHING.

Or are you willing to say "NTSHMA" to pretty much anything that doesn't confirm your own POV?

FourthBase » Fri Feb 21, 2014 6:49 pm wrote:

American Dream » 21 Feb 2014 09:56 wrote:It is a passion of mine to investigate and expose real conspiracies through investigations that can be backed by strong evidence, investigations that have the potential to seriously benefit our lives through significantly advancing our collective liberation. I think there is great power in researchers with shared values and shared interests working together on shared goals.

Fundamental to this process is a solid critique of White Supremacy, Patriarchy, Capitalism, Homophobia and all the other "isms". Folks that I can think of that are veering in this direction include Tom Burghardt, Peter Dale Scott, Jeffrey Kaye, maybe Robin Ramsay (I never subscribed to Lobster)- and perhaps others, too.

Given the criticism of "conspiracy theories" by structuralist-oriented leftists such as Noam Chomsky, who write it all off due to an overblown "Right Woos Left" kind of thesis, I think we need to develop Conspiracy Theory (with a capital "T") that is solidly anti-fascist, anti-racist, anti-authoritarian, anti-misogynist and also intelligently thought out.

What are the possibilities for helping make that happen more, here at Rigorous Intuition?

I vote for also having a solid critique of anti-capitalism, feminism, antiracism, queer theory, and the anti-fascist milieu in general. Us, too, basically. I propose that a solid critique of ourselves is also fundamental to investigation and liberation. Or did that kind of thing go out of style on the radical left? Or perhaps some folks are blinded by bias to their own blind spots, deaf to their own tone-deaf hypocrisy?

Let's investigate EVERYTHING.

Or are you willing to say "NTSHMA" to pretty much anything that doesn't confirm your own POV?

NeonLX » 21 Feb 2014 19:55 wrote:^^^^Being an old-@ssed, formerly protestant honky, I'm not able to comment on that post, slim.