I'm awfully sorry to hear about the break-in, George. I well know how invaded that makes you feel, and I can only imagine how scary it was to realize that it happened while you were in the house. Makes you an immediate proponent of the death penalty for a short while, doesn't it? Best wishes for a speedy mental recovery, not to mention financial, and here's hoping that lightning won't strike the same place again.

It seems a bit strange to me that my emotional reaction to the news of George's burglary is exactly the same as if it had been the home of meat-space friend that had been violated; despite the fact that I've never had a real interaction of any sort with him. In any case, I feel for you George!

Quoting bjkeefe: Makes you an immediate proponent of the death penalty for a short while, doesn't it?

I had a car stolen once from in front of my house. I felt so incredibly violated. The death penalty would not have been sufficient retribution. The raw emotion of the moment is overwhelming. And that was only for a lousy car. Not as bad as someone coming into your home. Nothing like a physical assault - even worse a sexual assault. The murder of someone close!!!! I am not sure we should take into account the feelings of victims when deciding the appropriate punishment of a criminal.

Quoting AemJeff: It seems a bit strange to me that my emotional reaction to the news of George's burglary is exactly the same as if it had been the home of meat-space friend that had been violated; despite the fact that I've never had a real interaction of any sort with him.

It doesn't seem strange to me. Once you've removed genetic connections that make you care more for a relative than another random human being, what makes you care about one "friend" over another? Presumably, proximity can play some role, sometimes (pheromones?), but generally, we're talking about intellectual connections. There is doubtless a whole range spanned by these, from rational appreciation of what another might have to offer you, to non-rational "I just get a good vibe" to irrational projection onto what you imagine that other person to be. Even so, it doesn't seem necessary to require physical presence to transmit a lot of this. I'm willing to grant that your connection with George is necessarily more limited than the one with your friend next door, but I'd say two things in response. First, it is often the case that you don't

Quoting bjkeefe: It doesn't seem strange to me. Once you've removed genetic connections that make you care more for a relative than another random human being, what makes you care about one "friend" over another? Presumably, proximity can play some role, sometimes (pheromones?), but generally, we're talking about intellectual connections. There is doubtless a whole range spanned by these, from rational appreciation of what another might have to offer you, to non-rational "I just get a good vibe" to irrational projection onto what you imagine that other person to be. Even so, it doesn't seem necessary to require physical presence to transmit a lot of this.

I'm willing to grant that your connection with George is necessarily more limited than the one with your friend next door, but I'd say two things in response. First, it is often the case that you don't get a complete picture of someone nearby whom you think you know. Second, even if more limited, the "lesser" connection doesn't mitigate the possibly strong emotional connection. Think how bad you felt when you heard, say, that George Carlin had died. Think about the way every news story about a big problem is required to tell

Another delightful summer illness is West Nile virus. I contracted it three summers ago and it has been a miserable experience. At the time, I could not find any information on the illness, and there is not any treatment for it. Plus, my doctor didn't believe that I had it, so I was not tested for it until 5 weeks after I contracted it. I know over 20 people personally who have had it, and the disease manifests itself differently from person to person. I still have not recovered completely.

My sympathies to George. When I was in college a man broke into my house during the night. I woke up just as he was turning the doorknob to my bedroom. I jumped out of bed and fortunately it scared him off. I saw only his backside as he ran out the door. I took me a long time to get over the fear and anxiety it caused. I really dodged a bullet thought, because a few years later they caught the guy and he was convicted of raping three women (one was elderly) and a little girl.

My car got broken into a week ago. Window smashed, GPS gone. Dammit. Much like George (and it might be a techie/science thing), I immediately have started daydreaming about ways to rig something up to nail them "the next time."

Quoting AemJeff: All good points. I want to find a distinction between the sort of relationship we have with people we physically interact with and those with whom we don't have a real-time relationship, but it's a lot more slippery than I would have expected.

Yes. I used to insist on the difference, too. My thinking on this has changed a lot in the past few years. I think it started with email, which began by resurrecting a number of relationships and then later added new ones. Somehow, that worked, in the way that phone calls never did. And then, of course as the Web was developed and grew more and more interactive, I realized started realizing that the distinction between cyberspace friends and meatspace friends was fading. Then I started thinking about how many of my meatspace friends I knew only through narrow channels -- this one was a basketball buddy, that one someone I knew only through a bar, and so forth. Any one of these was important to me, and had I heard something bad about them, it would have upset me, but I did come to think that there was a lot less of significance to my interacting with them

One could complain, but I think it's kind of endearing how the first 15 minutes were personal narratives/discussions. Bloggingheads is a cutting edge in some senses, so take note: the interaction of regularly paired contributors sort of naturally morph into a talk show.

Quoting thprop: I had a car stolen once from in front of my house. I felt so incredibly violated. The death penalty would not have been sufficient retribution. The raw emotion of the moment is overwhelming. And that was only for a lousy car. Not as bad as someone coming into your home. Nothing like a physical assault - even worse a sexual assault. The murder of someone close!!!!

I am not sure we should take into account the feelings of victims when deciding the appropriate punishment of a criminal.

I'm very sorry to hear about George's burglary. He comes across as such a good person, and we all hate when something bad happens to bad people. However, I also agree that the emotional reaction of revenge is somewhat disproportionate. I'm pretty sure George himself would agree once he cools down a bit. It is a good example as to why we can't take justice in our own hands!
Now, going to the rest of the talk today, I really enjoyed the discussion on Kuhn's work. I will listen to John's interview soon. I think that one of the main points for practical application was brought up by George when

Good thoughts, Ocean. Only complaint: nothing to argue about. ;^)

Quoting bjkeefe: Good thoughts, Ocean. Only complaint: nothing to argue about.

;^)

Sorry! I'll try harder next time. I'll try to come up with some sexist comments. That usually works...

Shock treatment is called ECT - Electroconvulsive Therapy. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is a wonderful book and movie. Unfortunately, it has given ECT a terrible reputation. It is considered a treatment of last resort only because of its reputation. Some think it should be a treatment of first or second resort. Watch the talk Sherwin Nuland gave at TED. Nuland is at the Yale School of Medicine and author of How We Die. Back in 1973, his depression was so severe that they were ready to perform a lobotomy on him. He says his life was saved by ECT. The CBC radio show Quirks & Quarks did a show on ECT, featuring Edward Shorter, the co-author of Shock Therapy.

Quoting thprop: Shock treatment is called ECT - Electroconvulsive Therapy. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is a wonderful book and movie. Unfortunately, it has given ECT a terrible reputation. It is considered a treatment of last resort only because of its reputation. Some think it should be a treatment of first or second resort.

Watch the talk Sherwin Nuland gave at TED. Nuland is at the Yale School of Medicine and author of How We Die. Back in 1973, his depression was so severe that they were ready to perform a lobotomy on him. He says his life was saved by ECT.

The CBC radio show Quirks & Quarks did a show on ECT, featuring Edward Shorter, the co-author of Shock Therapy.

Yes, all true...
John, you should embrace this cause and become a "crusader" to dispel the demons of stigma about ECT. We have to convince you that Psychiatry works. Sometimes, a little bit... Just humbly...

Quoting Ocean: Sorry! I'll try harder next time. I'll try to come up with some sexist comments. That usually works...

No, just say you believe in something that can't be proven scientifically. That should be good for about a week's worth of argument. ;-)

John: Thanks for posting that interview you did with Thomas Kuhn. I've listened to about the first 40 minutes, and it's quite enjoyable so far. I would ask that you consider making available an audio file for download, say, as an MP3. This would make it much more widely listened to, I suspect -- people could put it on their iPods or whatever, rather than having to be tied to a computer to listen to it.

I had my car broken into when I first moved to LA. I had about a $1K stereo system that was gone. I also had a bag of books on the floor of the passenger seat, they left those. I lived in a pretty low-income apartment complex with alot of sketchy neighbors. For about 6 months I was totally paranoid that everyone in complex was in on it. It definitely showed me how rationality goes right out the window after a scary experience. Sorry to hear about your break-in, George.

...hopefully aren't watching his diavlogs. If so, they've beat his security system.

Quoting Happy Hominid: ...hopefully aren't watching his diavlogs. If so, they've beat his security system.

You kidding? It's patently obvious that John is trying to lure crooks into his house, precisely to let Cujo loose on their asses.

It shocked me to hear George say "fuck", he usually cringes any time John uses any salty language! Proof positive of what an emotional impact the burglary had on him.

Will Wilkerson on writing Wikipedia entries

More fun with Wikipedia: While checking something in connection with John's interview with Thomas Kuhn, I came across this:

Paradigm shift, sometimes known as extraordinary science or revolutionary science, is the term first used by Thomas Kuhn in his influential 1962 book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions ...

and on another page, this:

In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (SSR) Kuhn argued that science does not progress via a linear accumulation of new knowledge, but undergoes periodic revolutions, also called "paradigm shifts" (although he did not coin the phrase),[2] in which ...

Note [2] points to:

2. Horgan, John (May 1991). "Profile: Reluctant Revolutionary". Scientific American: 40.

It's all connected, but it's not all consistent. And where's Stephen Colbert when you need him, anyway?

Holy crap, when is bhtv going to start paying you!! Nice piece of incoherence and bringing it home with John Horgan himself!

George, that's awful. I'm so sorry to hear about your burglary.

Quoting bjkeefe:

And where's Stephen Colbert when you need him, anyway?

He's probably trying to get George to sign up for the NRA!

Sorry to hear about the break-in. Just one of the worst feelings ever. I have twice caught people trying to steal from me, once a stereo from my car at a restaurant and once in a nightclub (trying to steal a leather jacket). I have to admit I went snake-eyed and hurt both the thieves. Afterwards, I didn't have remorse (over the injuries I inflicted), just second thoughts that they might've been armed or had someone watching their back. I had a friend who was stabbed in the back as he confronted a thief. I also once surprised a burgler attempting a break-in of my neighbor's home. Chased him but he was not only fast but big, was not looking forward to him stopping. He didn't.

Paradigm shift, sometimes known as extraordinary science or revolutionary science, is the term first used by Thomas Kuhn in his influential 1962 book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions ...

You could read the above sentence two ways, one of which would not be inconsistent with below:

In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (SSR) Kuhn argued that science does not progress via a linear accumulation of new knowledge, but undergoes periodic revolutions, also called "paradigm shifts" (although he did not coin the phrase),[2] in which ...

"First used" is ambiguous. Could be the first time HE used it or the first time it was used by anyone.

Quoting Wonderment: "First used" is ambiguous. Could be the first time HE used it or the first time it was used by anyone.

Yeah. Arguably. Way to ruin my fun.

Yeah. Arguably.

I agree it's not a good argument. Just barely plausible enough to satisfy the hobgoblins among us.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen* and philosophers** and divines.*** *Not Obama **Not Kuhn ***Pundits and (some) bloggers

George and John might have also mentioned depleted uranium as a mysterious source of war-related (pseudo?) illness.

Thank you all for your moral support. It means a lot. I am definitely in a phase where capital punishment for property crimes seems like a good idea. But I suspect it will pass.

Ocean's post should be expanded, I am a Family Physician and a "Generalist" I am painfully aware of the limitations of Medicine. The "Mind/Consciousness/Psyche" are far from being completely understood, everybody wants to be an expert, prestigious Philosophers are involved, but there is the limit of experimentation with Humans. The Scientific Method depends on theory-experiment-acquisition of data-analysis, followed by going back to the beginning since reality is never what we expected. Mr. Horgan's Physics background is not conducive to productive research in Human biology.

http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/129...3&out=00:56:47 Seriously the imagination he showed in formulating this scenario was pretty impressive. I loved the facial expressions by both of them about 40 seconds in.

George has a great gift for narrative. He's a natural storyteller. That doesn't necessarily make a great writer of fiction, but it's an awesome start; so odds are good he'd be a decent novelist.

He really does. The sections of Fire In the Mind where he described the local terrain and the native tribal history, really made me forget i was reading a "science" book. Or even "non-fiction" for that matter. For the longest time I could never find good science books that were simple enough for me to follow, and not-too-dry and textbook-y in their style (yawn). But since discovering BH, I have found so many great writers that really provide just the right balance of hard science and literary style to make for a real pleasurable read. George, John, Carl Z, Neil Shubin, to name a few. I can keep myself pretty busy just trying to catch up on BH science Sat books for the next couple years or so. I've got a Horgan, a Zimmer, a Peter Ward and a Pinker on the way from a little Amazon spree yesterday. I'm totally stoked. They are all great, but George is definitely one of the most poetic of the bunch (although Carl has a very literary style as well.)

I'd say you're taking it like a champ!

I've listened to 75 minutes now, and, although the interview is not stellar, there are some really amazing stretches. Firstly, though, when Horgan brought up Kuhn's argument about "evolving away" from traditions, not "evolving into the truth", I had an epiphany that struck me from two directions. Amazingly, in college, I had never considered Kuhn's argument, but I did get a large dose of American pragmatism and a couple classes on Lutheranism. Pragmatism showed me that truth was a social enterprise not a Platonic given. Lutheranism taught me God was unreachable, (except through Christ), and I very early on discounted the latter part. Throw in Darwin and Rousseau, and BANG! Nothing mystical there! Science and religion intersect in strange ways, and I think Kuhn's argument undercuts those scientists who believe a unified theory will reveal God. As a Lutheran, the fact that God is inhumanly remote doesn't encourage mysticism, it highlights the priority of action over thought. For Luther, thinking was a divine act the will corrupted. I understand how Kuhn wants to do good science regardless of whether it points toward the truth or God. As humans, there simply is no other choice but to endeavor, even without the conviction that truth is at the end. The alternative, not

Quoting Baltimoron: ... although the interview is not stellar, there are some really amazing stretches.

Well put. I've listened to the rest of it and can recommend it, although absent a good set of external speakers, some might want to wait to see if John makes a downloadable version available for disconnected listening. Maybe I'm projecting my own twitchiness, though.

... Kuhn's argument about "evolving away" from traditions, not "evolving into the truth" ...

I liked this way of thinking about things, too, although it gets a little carried away. Call me excessively pragmatic or overly impatient with metaphysical musings, but it was a little annoying to hear Kuhn refuse to budge on some of the examples that John gave where the truth is actually known (or knowable).

... I think Kuhn's argument undercuts those scientists who believe a unified theory will reveal God.

Is it your impression that a lot of scientists actually think this? I don't believe this to be the case. I think when guys like Hawking say things like "we will then know the mind of God," they're just being poetic. Or, they're being ironic, in the sense of Weinberg's "the more we learn about the universe, the more it

Quoting Happy Hominid: It shocked me to hear George say "fuck", he usually cringes any time John uses any salty language! Proof positive of what an emotional impact the burglary had on him.

I guess you folks have not spent much time around research scientists.
While they can present a very polished "Tweedy" or "academic chic" appearance and generally have a excellent command of the language or languages they use regularly and have reasonable manners. Under the right circumstances however they are neither naive about nor reticent in using language that would make the average construction worker blush. I include in this super set scientists of all academic achievement from Nobel Prize winners to first year grad students and undergraduate of both genders, all ethnicities and national origins. They are all highly motivated unabashedly completive and high entrepreneurial folks. They are not naive or shrinking violets. They got (and stay) were they are by brains and ambition and generally not "breeding". They are simply discrete and intelligent enough to know what is appropriate for a given situation. A real insight to the average scientists command of profanity is achieved when you

Quoting bjkeefe: I'm awfully sorry to hear about the break-in, George. I well know how invaded that makes you feel, and I can only imagine how scary it was to realize that it happened while you were in the house.

Makes you an immediate proponent of the death penalty for a short while, doesn't it?

Best wishes for a speedy mental recovery, not to mention financial, and here's hoping that lightning won't strike the same place again.

George: I second Brendan's sentiment and concern and suggest that this is a sign that you need a high quality home security system and a secure room you can retreat into during a home invasion (masonry walls or a layer of plywood under the drywall a solid core door opening inward with secure locking device and a independent telephone/data/intrusion alarm console and cell phone. Do not underestimate the seriousness of having your home invaded while you were at home. This could have been a much more serious situation had you or your wife accidentally interrupted the perp or perps in the act. No need to become paranoid but some simple preparation

Quoting Ocean: He's probably trying to get George to sign up for the NRA!

Ocean: There are worse things! You might be surprised by the overlap in the membership lists of the National Rifle Associations (of the US and Britain) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Royal Society. Besides that would be more legally defensible than attaching what would likely be ruled to be an "infernal device" to the office door knob! ;^) Richard (AARP & NRA Life Member)

Quoting Richard from Amherst: I guess you folks have not spent much time around research scientists.
While they can present a very polished "Tweedy" or "academic chic" appearance and generally have a excellent command of the language or languages they use regularly and have reasonable manners.

Under the right circumstances however they are neither naive about nor reticent in using language that would make the average construction worker blush.

Richard

Historically John has been much more liberal in his use of language, and George appears uncomfortable when he hears the four letter words. That's why it was so surprising to hear him using them. I think he is possessed... We should monitor the situation and be ready for exorcism if needed.

Quoting Richard from Amherst: Ocean:

There are worse things!

You might be surprised by the overlap in the membership lists of the National Rifle Associations (of the US and Britain) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Royal Society.

Besides that would be more legally defensible than attaching what would likely be ruled to be an "infernal device" to the office door knob! ;^)

Richard (AARP & NRA Life Member)

The infernal device supports my theory about possession... He even wanted to tape it to rejoice with the gruesome scene later!
I'm sorry, George, you were soooooo out of character that it has created a lot of turmoil in the audience.
As to the NRA, I'm still to see one shred of evidence that allowing people to have weapons has any benefit for society. There seems to be evidence of the opposite effect though... Unless being number one is such a great need for this country that being at the top in violence among developed countries is the main driving force. I will throw in a little bit of gender issues: what is the percentage of women who are members of NRA? One would

Concerning Lyme Disease: Lyme disease might be a really good subject for a whole blogging heads segment with people with strong backgrounds in both Lyme Disease research and medical insurance. It would be a really good microcosm to examine the pros and cons of the various method of funding medical care and medical research. I have several friends and acquaintances who have been afflicted by Lyme Disease. Some of them were quickly cured and others are still suffering (two of them have serious complications). One of them a 78 year old woman who got the tick from her dog in New Jersey and the other a scientist in the Albany area who got it working in his back yead. Both have serious complications and are having a bad time of it. The elderly woman is doing better because she has the independent means and family medical connections to identify and see the best specialists and get treatment not covered by insurance. Preexisting conditions in her heart makes this level of treatment imperative. The scientist has only NY state insurance and modest means

Quoting Richard from Amherst: Concerning Lyme Disease:

This is a highly controversial subject and one that cuts to the heart of the health care debate in this nation as well a disease research establishment and the pharmacology industry.

Richard

National (universal) health insurance would have more of an emphasis in preventive medicine and early detection and treatment. That would probably solve a piece of the problem. Regulating health insurance, and pharmaceutical companies as well as limiting the for-profit status of any industry related to health would also help. Firing everybody that works for NIH and makes decisions on funding would be another step. Redesigning how medical research is conducted would also get us closer... For what I have seen, the bloggingheads Saturday science crowd is not heavily medical. I'm not sure they would be excited to take this one on.

Quoting Ocean: I will throw in a little bit of gender issues: what is the percentage of women who are members of NRA? One would think many since our ability to physically defend ourselves from assault is quite limited, right? Or is there some other logic operating in the female mind?

I took a quick look at the NRA web site and could not find the % however you can check out http://www.nrahq.org/women/index.asp for details on the NRA's Women's Programs. I am not advocating George or anyone getting a gun for any purpose though I will advocate retaining the right to make that choice for American Citizens. I know a number of women who own and carry arms for protection, a large number of them are feminists by anyone's definition. One in particular who comes to mind is the first licensed first class stationary engineer in the history of Massachusetts. Running a steam power plant is a rough business and she says she needs the edge for just the reasons you state. The biochemical and psychologically nature of the human brain and the influences of gender there on is a

Quoting Richard from Amherst:
The biochemical and psychologically nature of the human brain and the influences of gender there on is a slippery slope you are not going to lure me into descending on this particular Sunday morning. Sorry been there, done that have the scars to show for it and I have other work to do today. ;^)

Richard

There are always exceptions to the rule...
I agree with you. I thought of letting the NRA and gender issues go, as they are unresolvable. In fact, the gender issue wasn't central, but just a point to be made on the NRA. Most surely I wouldn't want you to descend on any slippery slope. On the contrary, the implicit, perhaps naive, hope is to "elevate". But, again, extremely difficult to address these topics, especially when you don't know the players and the potential biases. Enjoy the rest of the day!

Quoting Ocean: National (universal) health insurance would have more of an emphasis in preventive medicine and early detection and treatment. That would probably solve a piece of the problem. Regulating health insurance, and pharmaceutical companies as well as limiting the for-profit status of any industry related to health would also help. Firing everybody that works for NIH and makes decisions on funding would be another step. Redesigning how medical research is conducted would also get us closer... For what I have seen, the bloggingheads Saturday science crowd is not heavily medical. I'm not sure they would be excited to take this one on.

Lyme Disease doesn't have to be a part of Science Sunday it could be a freestanding subject. I am not sure I agree with you on National (Universal) Health Care. The New York State plan is closer to it than almost anything in the US and they just write the fellow I describe off as not having a problem. He got early treatment, early diagnosis and antibiotics early and his treatment was somehow either ineffective or botched or both and as a result became chronic and now they are simply

Quoting Richard from Amherst: I am not sure I agree with you on National (Universal) Health Care.

The New York State plan is closer to it than almost anything in the US and they just write the fellow I describe off as not having a problem.

But in the contrasting example you gave earlier:

Quoting Richard from Amherst: The elderly woman is doing better because she has the independent means and family medical connections to identify and see the best specialists and get treatment not covered by insurance.

it did not sound like the privatized health insurance system worked, either. Sounds like what happened is the woman could afford to pay for extra care out of her own pocket and took advantage of personal connections. So, why not support a national health care plan to give everyone some basic minimum level of care? Presumably, doctors wouldn't be prohibited from working outside the system and catering to those who wanted to pay for more, or different, care.

Quoting bjkeefe: it did not sound like the privatized health insurance system worked, either. Sounds like what happened is the woman could afford to pay for extra care out of her own pocket and took advantage of personal connections.

So, why not support a national health care plan to give everyone some basic minimum level of care? Presumably, doctors wouldn't be prohibited from working outside the system and catering to those who wanted to pay for more, or different, care.

Brendan: I concur with your point that in my experience private health care, at least as practiced in the country does not work very will either in either public or private form especially for odd ball things like Lyme Disease. That's why I suggested the subject. Certainly the current private / public system is prone to all sorts of abuses and the quality of biomedical research, routine health care, chronic illness care and elder care are directly influenced by one education, personal influence, economic resources, geographic location, and perhaps most of all social class and in some cases even media savvy. It is not a lot different from other public / private system like the financial

Richard: Two things. First, I don't think the "we can't afford it" argument works. The real reason I think it makes economic sense is that so many CEO types appear to be getting on board in support of a national plan, alongside the wonks, the do-gooders, and the have-notes. Considering your MA example, I think that it's probably not fair to evaluate whether the program works over a couple of years with all other things being held equal, especially on a state level. There could be complications that result from, say, out-of-state people taking advantage, balanced budget or other legal spending constraints and mandates, or it could just be growing pains while the system is tuned. I also think you have to consider the trend, which shows health care costs having grown way faster than inflation and projected to continue to do so. I'm not a big fan of the "right to health care" argument, but if we as a society have decided that it would be a social good (and maybe also, a long-term economic good) to guarantee everyone some level of health care, then we should just bite the bullet and figure out how we're going to pay

On the puzzle=solvers point, perhaps "puzzles" comes too close to "games". Perhaps what these disputants criticize is the lack of a moral purpose inherent in their enterprise. Did you hear the stretch about "paradigms"? After that interview it will be impossible to read Kuhn's argument as a postmodern text. I agree professors have the right to teach their own curricula, but when the author objects to your whole purpose, perhaps one should reconsider. Intentionally telling students to avoid Kuhn's revised response is stubborn indeed. There's nothing wrong with fuzzy thinking. I think Kuhn's experience with both postmodernists and scientists points to a need to go beyond the traditional notions of truth.

Quoting Baltimoron: On the puzzle=solvers point, perhaps "puzzles" comes too close to "games". Perhaps what these disputants criticize is the lack of a moral purpose inherent in their enterprise.

That's a thought. Or even if not a moral purpose, at least something that sounds a little more grand. Still, I'd bet that the average scientist who takes "puzzle-solver" as an outright insult is someone who I'd find pompous.

Did you hear the stretch about "paradigms"? After that interview it will be impossible to read Kuhn's argument as a postmodern text. I agree professors have the right to teach their own curricula, but when the author objects to your whole purpose, perhaps one should reconsider. Intentionally telling students to avoid Kuhn's revised response is stubborn indeed.

Yeah, that last bit absolutely killed me to hear. The whole politicization and bastardization of Kuhn's work made me really feel for him. It reminded me of the stories that Edward O. Wilson told Bob on MoL.tv, where his work was first criticized for being too right-wing, and is now criticized for being too left-wing, while the actual science never fundamentally changed. And let's not forget, it had to do with ants.

There's nothing

First, Richard, I don't know whether I interpreted this right: "Hey but I'm just a cranky old white guy with sixty years of education and experience so what do I know next to some green (in every possible meaning of the word) kids?" Who is green? Kids? Oh Gosh, if it is what I think, thank you!!! I guess all is relative, I don't have sixty years of anything... At this point of my life I do get excited when someone may imply I'm green... Now, on a serious note. I agree with Brendan's comments. He wrote that so well I don't need to repeat. But the main points are: National health insurance cannot be evaluated by what individual states are doing. There are too many differences between a local effort and a well integrated and organized national plan. Some useful models may be found in Canadian or British health systems. But even those cases don't need to be exactly replicated if American people want something different. The money that goes into "health care" is not well distributed. First, there is the huge leak that goes to the pocket of investors. Yes, money that is supposed to go to health goes to investors. Is that right? Could this