NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/alt/sci/physics/newtheo/2589

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-22 | 7.1 KB

Xref: sparky alt.sci.physics.new-theories:2589 sci.physics:21633 alt.psychology.personality:330
Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,alt.psychology.personality
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!noring
From: [e-mail] (Jon Noring)
Subject: A Little Something to Add to the Moderation Discussion
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 00:03:55 GMT
Lines: 134


[I've cross-posted this otherwise physics issue to alt.psychology.personality
since it deals with the MBTI personality-typing system.]


Hello,

A while ago, I posted some information from the Center for Frontier Sciences,
Temple University, Dr. Beverly Rubik, Director.  It elicited, shall we say,
a "lively" response in the best tradition of Usenet.  Below is an e-mail
message to Brian (forgive me for not having his last name here), who had an
impressively well-thought out, but very critical appraisal of the original
information posted by the Center.

I reproduce this letter below since it deals, further down in the text, with
my assertion that scientists need to develop (if it does not come naturally)
an "open-minded skepticism" concerning new ideas, speculations, etc.  This is
my contribution to the recent discussion concerning forming a moderated physics
newsgroup in the sci.physics hierarchy.  I will not make any specific
statement or stand about that issue (there are good arguments on both sides of
the issue), but I will let the letter below establish my underlying
philosophical beliefs.

I will also repost the Truzzi lecture which I mention below.

Enjoy.

Jon Noring


********************begin letter***********************

To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: REPOST: Truzzi Lecture (Was: Center for Frontier Sciences...)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.skeptic
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

Hi Brian,

I appreciate your well-thought out appraisal of the CFS activities, unlike
the knee-jerk reactions of some of the others who *supposedly* have read the
posts.

I'll forward your excellent comments to the Center (they should be on
the net soon, so I will no longer have to be the go-between messenger of
"bad" news.)

Let me clarify my position on the Center:

I have not been convinced of many of the "stands" of the Center (e.g.,
homeopathic medicine disturbs me).  However, after receiving copies of all
back-issues of their journal, "Frontier Perspectives", I became attracted to
*some* of the work of the Center, particularly the lecture series, for example,
the energy and SED work by Puthoff, and Truzzi's sociological analysis of
scientific orthodoxy (both of which I've posted).  I (usually) do not demand
that any scientific institution be completely *pure* with respect to my
viewpoints in order to find something good therein - as long as they are
supporting research that I have an interest in and are not promoting anything
that I find dangerous or immoral.  Or, to put it another way, I'll accept the
wheat with the chaff.

As you are pretty well aware, I am definitely a very open-minded scientist,
and have ruffled some feathers in netland with my posts on Bearden, Puthoff,
etc., who themselves are rocking the boat with respect to present-day
scientific thinking.  I believe in giving every scientist a *non-hostile*
public forum wherein they can present their assertions and claims to their
peers without fear of hostile reprisals, since even if their assertions prove
to come up short after analysis (which most do), they just might provide
information and a new way of looking at things that can trigger somebody
else to come up with a real innovation in science and engineering.  I see
Usenet as that forum.

In addition, I believe that a non-hostile scientific environment will
significantly increase the number of scientists who will make worthwhile
contributions in new scientific realms, since a large minority have
personality types (e.g., intuitive-feelers) who cannot contribute in a
hostile environment - they are effectively closed out from making any
innovative contributions for fear of hostile reprisal.  Of course, those
scientists who have an intuitive-thinker personality (which I believe most
of the very negative posters have because of their terseness, a classic
characteristic of this personality type), will say "Tough-beans.  If they
can't stand the heat, then they should get out of the kitchen."  I, of
course, do not subscribe to this Darwinian attitude of science, that is,
the survival of the fittest mentality.  Though it has its advantages,
overall this mentality has stifled scientific growth more than it has
helped.  And most of us agree that scientific growth is beneficial for
mankind.

Thus, if I get downright hostile at certain scientists (and it's been hard to
bite my tongue lately), it's because their emotional, knee-jerk reactions to
what I have posted is obviously an attempt at intimidation to conform to what
they perceive to be scientific *orthodoxy*.  This violates my view that the
forum should be non-hostile (critical, yes, hostile, no).  Truzzi described
them so well in his lecture (it's been interesting that the same posters have,
with a couple of exceptions, left Truzzi's comments unchallenged.)  That's
why I find your post to be refreshing, since you spent significant time in
presenting your thoughts, though critical of the Center, in a rational and
humane way.

As an example of the effect that the other posters are having, I've had six
e-mail letters from scientists that I've been in touch with supporting my
posting of that material (they do not necessarily support the Center) and
were incredulous at the reception the posts received from some scientists.
Yet, they did not want to post anything publicly since they have reputations
to maintain and they did not feel that this battle was worth it (two are
professors at major universities, and one is a top physicist at the Lab I
work at).  Thus, I've seen firsthand the detrimental effects that a hostile
scientific environment can produce.

Anyway, I appreciate your post, and I'll be seeing you around in netland.

Jon Noring

(p.s., I just read what I wrote, and I apologize if I ramble a little, I just
didn't have the time to clean it up.)

*************end of letter*************



--

Charter Member of the INFJ Club.

Now, if you're just dying to know what INFJ stands for, be brave, e-mail me,
and I'll send you some information.  It WILL be worth the inquiry, I think.

=============================================================================
| Jon Noring          | [e-mail]        | I VOTED FOR PEROT IN '92 |
| JKN International   | IP    : 192.100.81.100   | Support UNITED WE STAND! |
| 1312 Carlton Place  | Phone : [phone]   | "The dogs bark, but the  |
| Livermore, CA 94550 | V-Mail: [phone]   |  caravan moves on."      |
=============================================================================
Who are you?  Read alt.psychology.personality!  That's where the action is.