It is, in fact, dangerous to be curious and open-minded in our society. In 1997 I was the head of the division of Nonlinear Dynamics and Open Systems at the Institute ofTheoretical Physics of the University of Wroclaw, Poland. Being open-minded myself I put some of my ideas about the possible links between the phenomena of consciousness and physics on my web pages (that can be viewed even today using the WayBackMachine).
Instantly I was attacked and gossip began to spread about me. I was told that it “creates a bad image of the Institute”. At first I was outraged at this censorship. Here is what I wrote at that time to my fellow professors and administrators at the Uni who were actively defaming me by actually sinking to the low level of writing letters of denunciation to my colleagues abroad (shown to me by these colleagues!):
"I am not propagating anything else but a scientific content. Science includes also philosophical and humanistic ideas. I am not expecting that you will agree with me, since in science disputes are normal. What is not normal is silencing those who have a somewhat wider view on science and its goals. I am ready to discuss with you, and with anybody else, any content-related serious discussion. Please tell me which particular formulation on my pages you consider inappropriate and why? Let us discuss it, and perhaps I will change my mind, or perhaps – you.…
My pages are stressing the necessity of being open-minded. You do not have to read them – if it is something that outrages you. You are using slogans. Let us talk about the details – what in particular do you want me to change and why?"
I never received an answer. But I did receive a letter of apology from one of my colleagues who was spreading gossip about me abroad. And that happened probably only because these letters were shown to me by the recipients, I knew the content and I knew who wrote them. Anonymous defamers and anonymous referees sing a different tune when their identities are known.
P.S.1 The past events described above remind me this story (taken from "PLOTINUS AND THE ENNEADS") at
"4. His Circle and Rivals
The circle of Plotinus apparently did not constitute any official school. When Porphyry (c.232-305) joined that circle, Plotinus had been teaching for twenty years in Rome. "Porphyry was unable to gain immediate access to his teacher's writings, which were circulated only amongst a select circle of students." (10)
The element of secrecy has been attributed to the concern of Plotinus at publicly revealing the teaching of his master Ammonius. Disciples of the deceased philosopher had apparently made an agreement not to divulge what they had learnt; the agreement was later broken, and so Plotinus followed suit. One explanation is that the rivalry exercised by professional Platonist orators was countered in this manner; those orators may have had vested interests in narrowing down the Platonist heritage.
As a foreigner living in Rome, Plotinus was careful not to make enemies; he gained the reputation of being an arbitrator, according to Porphyry (who, however, is thought to have minimised the resistance factors). Plotinus evidently did have an enemy in Olympius, an Alexandrian pupil of Ammonius who also taught philosophy at Rome. According to Porphyry, the cause of this friction was jealousy on the part of Olympius, who eventually resorted to sorcery, seeking to destroy Plotinus with astrological spells. This bizarre episode may have contributed to the latter's dislike of astrological superstition. Plotinus parried the assault, and Olympius afterwards desisted."
Except that in the case described in this post the gossip, vilification, and jealousy, are alive even after all these years.
Next post: A Brush With the Dark Side of Science
Previous post: Ray Hyman and Modern Apathy: To Explain Away and Dismiss
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment..