Cultural studies was probably one of the best courses I took through out my post secondary education. Not only did it open my eyes to subjects about feminism and racism, but it also showed me that science - if used under inane pretenses - can become the bane of society. Right when the first colonials labeled the "others" living on this Earth have there been idiotic claims to catalog and even conquer those where not "us" through racial/physical discourse studies. Michael Foucault introduced extreme cases of early American scientists cataloging madness at insane asylums. As extreme as that is, why do I find this report adding to the circle of these discourses?
At first I read it with no humour in mind, but within the writing of the article Regina Nuzzo made me laugh when she said "A link between male homosexuality and finger lengths isn't holding up, and a claim that gays have distinctive fingerprint ridge patterns is largely discredited." So while she lists a multitude of "scientific claims" on what being gay looks like, she is in effect saying that the studies are a waste of time.
There are those who truly want to know the truth about how people become who they are. I personally think it starts with birth all the way to personal experience. That is something you can't measure by the standards of science, because everyone is different and reaction to certain stimuli exposure differs as well. It would be easy for me to plug in a religious reference in here, but I won't, because you can make up your own mind about this topic.
Religion has a good way of scaring you into telling you who you are and who you are not. While science has a good way of telling you how the world and universe works, it cannot tell you who you are as a person.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment