Nice article – would you be up for me re-posting this piece on my SF zine over at http://www.SFcrowsnest.com as an article with all the usual attributions back to Allumination?

First of all, there’s the misuse of scientific rhetoric – so non-scientific disciplines or positions claim a scientific level of objectivity / rightness, in an attempt to gain an absolute, unarguable authority.

Secondly, there’s the faith that by rationally explaining aspects of the world, you can know the whole perfectly and thus dominate it in the most productive and right-for-all way possible.

Both different examples of spilt religion, and both equally dishonest (and destructive, when taken to extremes!). Ironic also that both should use a stance founded on open-minded, rigorous exploration to coat the subjective in a rhetoric that designed to deter any argument or exploration at all.

Just one thing: scientific method presupposes an innate respect for a commonly accepted, demonstrably true and entirely subjective set of truths — do you really mean “subjective” and not objective? In that case, can you explain a bit?