Counterpoint by Mark Nicol – Social science is dead

| March 1, 2021

God is not dead. Social Science surely is.

But the nexus, as per the historic, moral thinking of mankind goes, is this. Ancient Regime practitioners of false religious thinking, theologians, had to be disinvested of moral, political authority in order for Western civilization to achieve a modernist cultural pedigree. If Modern Man is to grasp a futurist cultural pedigree, mature command over a sustainable, noble destiny, we must first be rid of our own false moralogical theorists, visionaries, the academy of Social Scientists.

The very terminology, social science, actually betrays one core deficiency writ in modernist moralogical conception. Why opt for an overarching descriptor, for disciplines attending to human moral expressions, as a science?

Human behaviour, of any kind, is first up prompted by some moral imperative, rude or refined. Even the study of economics, properly referencing social economies of labour, etc., working within the sphere of materialistic enterprise, it is at crux examining the logistical operations of collective self-interest behaviour.

Self-interested, materialistic behaviour surely inflects the crudest denomination of human moral action, akin to the instinctive predatory habits of brute animals. Man, though, is in varying degrees capable of conceiving, activating three higher tier visions of moral imperative, humanitarian, environmentalist, religiously affirmative.

At his highest potential, invested with true volitional potential, man makes the choice in any given situation to assert one value over another, along that gradient of selfish to selfless options. Such is the complexity of nature’s governing moral paradigm, however, that a myopic selfish action can in protracted effect prove self harmful, a judicious selfless action may in gestation prove self beneficial.

Why opt for an overarching descriptor, for disciplines attending to human moral expressions, as a science?

There was an opportunistic, historical prompt.

The intellectual birthing of modernist culture was founded upon that Enlightenment thinking discrediting Ancient Regime moralogical conception, theology. The subsequent production of scientific conception, dissertation, freed from Ancient Regime theocratic proscription yielded a new intellectual discipline generating enormous technological, practical dividends.

Scripters of the new moral thinking aimed to garner the intellectual credibility of the new scientific profession to their theses. But that reductive intellectual process, which works so well in securing logical explanations for physical forms, processes, does not work well when applied to subjective phenomena, moral actions, purposes.

Give me a logical reason as to why the boy crossed the road. Whatever the reason, it must fall back upon some subjective moral imperative, urge, the reasoning of which cannot be explained by science. Science can never explain first cause, the subjective phenomena of cosmic being, of moral actions.

Heedless to this intellectual incongruity, the modernist breed of moral theorist, visionary, pushed on with the appropriated placard of science for moral theories.

Under this new moralogical orthodoxy, ruse, first we were bombarded with the Teutonic weight of Marxian, Freudian conceptions, etc., tomes freely mixing heavy logic with heavy rhetoric, yet always effectively posing as science. Now we have lightweight fodder dished up by shamelessly self-acclaiming Social Scientists, pervasively pushing a moral rhetoric deemed above rational questioning.

This sounds amazingly reminiscent of Ancient World theocratic intimidation:

Don’t dare question the integrity of what I say, for, otherwise, thou shall be smitten by the hand of the Lord, now, by the sanctimony of righteous woke culture.

If any intellectual credibility, moral decency is parcelled in a moral value proposition, it must stand the test of rational questioning, validation. We must examine the cause and consequence action of that proposition, to determine if precedent, antecedent claims of cause are intellectually credible, morally healthy.

If the moral claim is myopically framed, attending to but one dimension of evaluation, the concerns of but one actor, we have a profound problem. Such is the nature of the black rights value currently championed by Western Social Science academia. There has never been an honest analysis undertaken to comprehend in rational terms how blacks historically positioned themselves as a generic underling culture, whites positioned themselves as a class overlord culture.

But, reflecting the extreme Leftist ideological lens, through which this scientific mind views political sociology, no other moral factor is deemed worthy of consideration other than propping up the underling.

Yet the generic underling, throughout human history, society, is not so much stationed there because of unfortunate chance. Individual and cultivated indolence, consequent ignorance – intellectual, technological, moral, volitional, is the strongest generating factor.

It does not suit the egalitarian narrative vamped by Green-Left academia, but natural selection throws up innate and cultivated inequalities, intellectual, volitional, individual, collective. If a football team committed to winning charitably accepts nature’s incompetents into its circle, then it is concomitantly committing to losing.

Which brings us to football, and the great woke charade of the day, championed, of course, by our Australian academy of devoutly disciplined Social Scientists.

I think Australian Rules Football the greatest game in the world, used to be a pretty good player picked for a conglomerate side to play against country competition. I played three years, finding the social culture boring, crude.

I perceive Eddy McGuire as a crass, myopic materialist, his love of footy a redeeming factor. Disinterested in race, I once singled Harry O’Brien as the most valuable player in a highly talented, tactically aggressive, winning Collingwood football team.

The same person, now stridently redefining himself by ethnicity as Héritier Lumumba, I would describe as just another ignorant, whinging black politicker, one who has wasted his enormous sporting talent to push an invalid class complainant cause.

The great intellects of our nation have gathered to this micro-byte Lumumba cause. It is the great titillation of the moment. The drums of the moral cognoscente beat as one.

Light operetta?

I see poor old Eddie, Fagan, ranting red with supposed racist invective, the chorus of warlock hunters murmuring, “Cur, cur”, thrusting pins in a noxious effigy. There is valiant Lumumba, Oliver, in the final scene watching on as the cur is hung, whilst he is awarded compensatory riches, a Brownlow.

The historical erudition of Mr. Lumumba should be contested with a few trite facts, to balance as against the names, not sticks, stones that have so much hurt him.

The nominem Héritier, Portuguese, references white Western colonists that invaded Héritier’s native Brazil, eliminated many of the 200 native tribes then extant. Héritier’s Congolese, Angolan heritage? Since outing Belgian colonists in 1960 Congolese nations have been permanently at war, the Hema-Lendu, Kivu, Allied Democratic Forces insurgencies all still active. Since evicting Portuguese custodians in 1974, Angola has been constantly ravaged by warring between the Ambundu, Bakunga, Ovimbundu tribes.

Perhaps, when blacks or ‘blacks’ come to Australia, whinge, they might opt to return to the pacific, luxuriant comforts of home – less the wheel, internal combustion engine, four walls, telecommunications, university patronage, and civil environment afforded by white Western culture.

This is the great gift that Social Science academics bestow upon the Western culture financing them – inciting class complainant cultures, black, homosexual, female, to lay siege upon the home citadel. The same with profiteering law firms, encouraging the wounded to hit their supposed malefactors for everything they can get, claiming such as absolute moral right. Yes, the law has profitably sided with the class underling, too, such that the progressive march of Western society is hamstrung by this sacred, overwrought attendance to the ‘injured’.

If a contesting football team, a marching army devotes most of its time attending to the injured, faux injured, it will lose the game, the war. The West, today, is locked into the precipitate phase of perilous existential war with three clear foes, China, the Nation of Islam, Russia. In this light, we see false class complainants in our midst as enemies of State. Worse, we perceive academics, nurturing egoistic complainants, as cultural subversives, traitors.

If there was no Western agency contesting the natural socio-economic, political dominance of Right-wing interests, big business, attenuate political play-makers, we would suffer a horrendous culture, devastating humane and environmental fabrics.

But it is not the proper job of academics, working in faculties of moral, philosophical conception, to assume a counter politicking function. Nor is it the proper job of legal and press professionals. In proper function, the academic should provide reasoned, balanced intellectual enlightenment, the law should provide reasoned, balanced moral argument, the press should provide the same in news presentation.

The 21st Century mania cultures, liberalism, egalitarianism, political populism, have hounded reason out of moral, political, cultural argument. The one-sided theatrical beating, which forced Eddy McGuire out of the job he loved most, served well in, is just one shameful act pushed through by a dumb, vicious Leftist lobby.

The Age of Reason?

Moral reactivity, more than reason, was the Enlightenment impetus.

Social Scientists?

They haven’t even provided us with an honest, fundamental account of progression in human history, the truly telling narrative of human cultural evolution – technological, teleological, volitional. Next week.