|
Re: the ascent of 'counterknowledge'
the thing is in the 1st few paragraphs he mentions the autism theory, yet this "counter-knowledge" is something that is based on years off observational science, yet not proven by actual science (as yet) so i feel that he was unfair to sight that as an example,
But on general i can see his general points
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|