- Email: [email protected]
Plot and counterpoint
See newscientist.com for letters on: ● Future imperfect ● Burned by pastry? ● Troll tales ● Creationism in Turkey ● Religion of the real ● Unkind milk
Capital idea
I have no problem with having evolved from animals, and with being an animal, but look how far we have come. What animal has the sense of wonder that we have, or the curiosity? What animal has produced a symphony, or integral calculus, or probed the galaxies, or invented surgery or antibiotics, or painted a landscape, constructed microprocessors or 747s, or developed politics and morals? Of course our ancestry is evident in our aggression, our caretaking, our social patterns and so on; but our complex brains have taken us so far beyond that. Out of complexity, a higher order of functioning has emerged which has opened a yawning chasm between us and our nearest relatives. We may still murder and rape, but not inevitably. The analogy of a spectrum is misleading, as it implies a difference in wavelength only, with the essentials unchanged. But this isn’t a spectrum, it’s a hierarchy (a dirty word for postmodernists, I know). This is extreme postmodernism gone mad, and is another example of reductionism trying to bring us down to being nothing more than talking apes. The danger here is that if we really believe this guff it reduces our incentive to rise above our humble instincts and proclivities. Yes, I’m intellectually arrogant and proud to be, and eternally grateful for my big powerful brain. We may still be lying in the gutter, but some of us are definitely looking up at the stars. Ringwood, Hampshire, UK www.newscientist.com
070331_R_Letters.indd 23
From Maarten Splinter Adrian Pollock portrays capitalism as the main obstacle to a sustainable future (10 March, p 23). I suggest the problem is that the “science” of economics makes a basic assumption that time is the ultimate scarce good we have. When “time is money”, the more processes will be speeded up to be economic. The technology to realise this uses more power and thus more free energy – as defined in the 1870s by mathematical physicist Willard Gibbs – and more carbon dioxide. The laws of thermodynamics should have taught us that Gibbs free energy is the ultimate scarce good – not for the individual consumer but for humanity and for all natural systems. We have to develop a macroeconomic theory based on the scarcity of free energy. And we have to develop technology to minimise the use of free energy: not only direct use, but also indirect use as capital and materials in production and consumption. The economy has to slow down. Nuenen, The Netherlands From Brian Hicks Economists recognise that a command economy, such as Cuba’s, has such inherent inefficiencies that it is not viable in the long term. In that sense, there is no alternative to capitalism. The question is how much state regulation you wish to have, and how far you wish market forces to operate. I naturally agree that “capitalism needs continually to expand”. Any economic system needs to maintain employment in the face of growth in the size of the labour force and in productivity. In striving for this, western economies have engaged in unsustainable consumption of resources. But if you accept that price and profit signals in a (relatively) free market can be an
aid to change, then the capitalist economy has a part to play in achieving sustainability. Beckenham, Kent, UK
Laptops for whom? From Trish Glazebrook It is unclear how the One Laptop per Child project can achieve meaningful goals without higher levels of literacy (24 February, p 27). According to the UN Development Programme’s 2005 report, Thailand has a literacy rate of 92.6 per cent, Brazil 88.4 per cent, Libya 81.7 per cent, Nigeria 66.8 per cent, and Rwanda 64 per cent. Then there are the further
inequalities uncovered when the figures are disaggregated by gender. There is also the question of whether the laptops will remain in the children’s hands. Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
It takes two From Christina Nash A national healthcare system which includes annual Pap smears is crucial to preventing cervical cancer, as Ralph Moss says (24 February, p 20), but that is only part of the solution. There also needs to be a mandatory test for men. As someone who has gone through a human papilloma virus diagnosis and ensuing biopsy, what is most frightening is that women usually have no idea who the virus came from in the first place.
A three-pronged battle plan is needed: optional vaccination, mandatory and free annual Pap smears, and a test for men to be included with other standard tests for sexually transmitted infections. Malta, New York, US
Plot and counterpoint From Elizabeth Carrey Jonathan Gottschall tells us that literature can be analysed from the perspective of Darwinian strategies related to survival in ancient societies (3 March, p 38). If the Greek heroes, and their descendants in thrillers and adventure stories, reflect a world in which men were men and women were scarce, then surely modern romantic fiction must reflect female strategies for mate selection in our society, and detective stories describe the battle against destabilisation of society. Publishers of genre fiction know that readers of boy-meetsgirl romances dislike adultery; similarly, it’s wrong to kill people, so the detective usually gets his man. These rules are imposed through the wallet of readers who desire a world of moral certainty. But writers of literary fiction often ignore or subvert these rules – which is why they provide so much more than a good yarn. Adulterous liaisons in Michael Ondaatje’s The English Patient and the curious glamour awarded to the serial killer in Patrick Süskind’s Perfume add depth, moral ambiguity and perhaps a little disgust to the enveloping experience of a good read. London, UK
Letters should be sent to: Letters to the Editor, New Scientist, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS Fax: +44 (0) 20 7611 1280 Email: [email protected] Include your full postal address and telephone number, and a reference (issue, page number, title) to articles. We reserve the right to edit letters. Reed Business Information reserves the right to use any submissions sent to the letters column of New Scientist magazine, in any other format.
31 March 2007 | NewScientist | 23
23/3/07 4:59:35 pm
Capital idea
I have no problem with having evolved from animals, and with being an animal, but look how far we have come. What animal has the sense of wonder that we have, or the curiosity? What animal has produced a symphony, or integral calculus, or probed the galaxies, or invented surgery or antibiotics, or painted a landscape, constructed microprocessors or 747s, or developed politics and morals? Of course our ancestry is evident in our aggression, our caretaking, our social patterns and so on; but our complex brains have taken us so far beyond that. Out of complexity, a higher order of functioning has emerged which has opened a yawning chasm between us and our nearest relatives. We may still murder and rape, but not inevitably. The analogy of a spectrum is misleading, as it implies a difference in wavelength only, with the essentials unchanged. But this isn’t a spectrum, it’s a hierarchy (a dirty word for postmodernists, I know). This is extreme postmodernism gone mad, and is another example of reductionism trying to bring us down to being nothing more than talking apes. The danger here is that if we really believe this guff it reduces our incentive to rise above our humble instincts and proclivities. Yes, I’m intellectually arrogant and proud to be, and eternally grateful for my big powerful brain. We may still be lying in the gutter, but some of us are definitely looking up at the stars. Ringwood, Hampshire, UK www.newscientist.com
070331_R_Letters.indd 23
From Maarten Splinter Adrian Pollock portrays capitalism as the main obstacle to a sustainable future (10 March, p 23). I suggest the problem is that the “science” of economics makes a basic assumption that time is the ultimate scarce good we have. When “time is money”, the more processes will be speeded up to be economic. The technology to realise this uses more power and thus more free energy – as defined in the 1870s by mathematical physicist Willard Gibbs – and more carbon dioxide. The laws of thermodynamics should have taught us that Gibbs free energy is the ultimate scarce good – not for the individual consumer but for humanity and for all natural systems. We have to develop a macroeconomic theory based on the scarcity of free energy. And we have to develop technology to minimise the use of free energy: not only direct use, but also indirect use as capital and materials in production and consumption. The economy has to slow down. Nuenen, The Netherlands From Brian Hicks Economists recognise that a command economy, such as Cuba’s, has such inherent inefficiencies that it is not viable in the long term. In that sense, there is no alternative to capitalism. The question is how much state regulation you wish to have, and how far you wish market forces to operate. I naturally agree that “capitalism needs continually to expand”. Any economic system needs to maintain employment in the face of growth in the size of the labour force and in productivity. In striving for this, western economies have engaged in unsustainable consumption of resources. But if you accept that price and profit signals in a (relatively) free market can be an
aid to change, then the capitalist economy has a part to play in achieving sustainability. Beckenham, Kent, UK
Laptops for whom? From Trish Glazebrook It is unclear how the One Laptop per Child project can achieve meaningful goals without higher levels of literacy (24 February, p 27). According to the UN Development Programme’s 2005 report, Thailand has a literacy rate of 92.6 per cent, Brazil 88.4 per cent, Libya 81.7 per cent, Nigeria 66.8 per cent, and Rwanda 64 per cent. Then there are the further
inequalities uncovered when the figures are disaggregated by gender. There is also the question of whether the laptops will remain in the children’s hands. Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
It takes two From Christina Nash A national healthcare system which includes annual Pap smears is crucial to preventing cervical cancer, as Ralph Moss says (24 February, p 20), but that is only part of the solution. There also needs to be a mandatory test for men. As someone who has gone through a human papilloma virus diagnosis and ensuing biopsy, what is most frightening is that women usually have no idea who the virus came from in the first place.
A three-pronged battle plan is needed: optional vaccination, mandatory and free annual Pap smears, and a test for men to be included with other standard tests for sexually transmitted infections. Malta, New York, US
Plot and counterpoint From Elizabeth Carrey Jonathan Gottschall tells us that literature can be analysed from the perspective of Darwinian strategies related to survival in ancient societies (3 March, p 38). If the Greek heroes, and their descendants in thrillers and adventure stories, reflect a world in which men were men and women were scarce, then surely modern romantic fiction must reflect female strategies for mate selection in our society, and detective stories describe the battle against destabilisation of society. Publishers of genre fiction know that readers of boy-meetsgirl romances dislike adultery; similarly, it’s wrong to kill people, so the detective usually gets his man. These rules are imposed through the wallet of readers who desire a world of moral certainty. But writers of literary fiction often ignore or subvert these rules – which is why they provide so much more than a good yarn. Adulterous liaisons in Michael Ondaatje’s The English Patient and the curious glamour awarded to the serial killer in Patrick Süskind’s Perfume add depth, moral ambiguity and perhaps a little disgust to the enveloping experience of a good read. London, UK
Letters should be sent to: Letters to the Editor, New Scientist, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS Fax: +44 (0) 20 7611 1280 Email: [email protected] Include your full postal address and telephone number, and a reference (issue, page number, title) to articles. We reserve the right to edit letters. Reed Business Information reserves the right to use any submissions sent to the letters column of New Scientist magazine, in any other format.
31 March 2007 | NewScientist | 23
23/3/07 4:59:35 pm