Some Potential Topics to Discuss*
  1. In chapters 7 & 8 of Science as Salvation, Midgley has chosen the titles Putting Nature in Her Place and The Remarkable Masculine Birth of Time. Working from this explore what Midgley is suggesting about the origin or modern science and how it has led to the various modes of interaction between science and religion.
  2. Midgley's book has the provocative title Science as Salvation - A Modern Myth and its Meaning. Provide an overview of Midgley's main argument or arguments and illustrate ways in which modern science occupies a "mythic dimension" in modern western culture
  3. Explore the anthropic principle (last half of Midgley as well as sections from McGrath will be useful here). Trace the origin of this idea as well as how it is used by a number of high profile scientists today.
  1. As much as she explores the meaning of “science,” Midgley also explores the meaning of “faith” throughout the book—not just “religious” faith (though she touches on this frequently—see, e.g., chapter 5) but also faith as a component within the meaning and practices of science. What does “faith” mean for Midgley, in its multidimensional sense?
  2. Ultimately Midgely’s book can be read as a call for humility in the sciences. Provide a multidimensional account (i.e., ranging over much of the book) of what that humility looks like for Midgely.
  3. In addition to exploring much of the hubris (i.e., the opposite of humility) of modern science, Midgley also explores in depth many of the existential losses to humanity that hubristic science seems to bring about and even celebrate. What are some of those losses, and how does Midgley challenge modern science to take responsibility for itself with respect to these?
  1. Mary Midgley writes, “We do not need to esteem science less. What we need is to esteem it in the right way. Especially we need to stop isolating it artificially from the rest of our mental life” (p. 37). What does she mean, and what do you understand her to be recommending for a proper way of esteeming science?
  2.   It felt to me that in Science as Salvation, Midgley was attempting to knock ‘science’ down a peg or two from its over-valorized position in this book, a position in which scientists are able to position all legitimate knowing as needing to be based on science. She also said “Science is something that has been built into our culture” (p. 127). So it felt peculiar reading in the Harper-Trump era of the “war on science” and “post-fact” and denial of climate science and other “inconvenient sciences”. Would you agree that this is what Midgley was trying to do? Do you think that science has the exalted position that Midgley paints it as having when she wrote the book? How do you think she would respond to contemporary conditions about the legitimacy of science? Could it be that these “science wars” are actually related to the position of science in our society?
  3.  Midgley refers to “that very odd map of the intellectual world... It shows only two areas, science and subjectivity. Outside science… everything is irrational” (p. 181). This is the “two cultures” approach to social epistemology (famous lecture by JB Snow, positing science vs humanities.)   Drawing on Midgley and other knowledge from the course, Why don’t (most) scientists draw on understandings from other human realms or fields of knowledge formation? Where would you place sociology in these “two cultures” (within “science” or within “humanities”)? What can sociology contribute to answering the first question (in italics)?

 

You may do a solo presentation (15 minutes + 5 minutes discussion) or work with a partner (20 minutes + 10 minutes discussion.) You are encouraged to use presentation software and/or prepare handouts. If you can get these to me in advance I will post them on the website.

 

*If you don't like any of these topics you may suggest your own. Pick a topic relevant to you and also to the main thrust of Migdley's book. Please "clear this" with one of us before proceeding.