R I E, I R A H
Retoric and Incommensurability
This page intentionally blank.
Retoric and Incommensurability
Edited and Introduced by Randy Allen Harris
Parlor Press West Lafayette, Indiana www.parlorpress.com
Parlor Press LLC, West Lafayette, Indiana 47906
© 2005 by Parlor Press All rigts reserved. Printed in te United States of America
S A N: 2 5 4 - 8 8 7 9
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Retoric and incommensurability / edited and introduced by Randy Allen Harris. p. cm. Includes bibliograpical references and index. ISBN 1-932559-49-3 (pbk. : alk. paper) -- ISBN 1-932559-50-7 (ardcover : alk. paper) -- ISBN 1-932559-51-5 (adobe ebook) 1. Science--Metodology. 2. Comparison (Pilosopy) I. Harris, Randy Allen. Q175.R434 2005 501--dc22 2005010812
Printed on acid-free paper. Cover art:“Tango,” oil on canvas, by Mark Fort, used courtesy of te Artist and Te Tory Folliard Gallery, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Parlor Press, LLC is an independent publiser of scolarly and trade titles in print and multimedia formats. Tis book is available in paper, clot and Adobe eBook formats from Parlor Press on te World Wide Web at ttp://www.parlorpress.com or troug online and brick-and mortar bookstores. For submission information or to find out about Parlor Press publications, write to Parlor Press, 816 Robinson St., West Lafayette, Indiana, 47906, or e-mail editor@parlorpress.com.
Incommensurability is a difficulty for pilosopers, not for scientists.
—Paul K. Feyerabend,Farewell to Reason
Properly understood—someting I’ve by no means always managed myself—incommensurability is far from being te treat to rational evaluation of trut claims tat it as fre-quently seemed. —Tomas S. Kun,Te Road since Structure
To divide umanity into irreconcilable groups wit irreconcil-able attitudes, aving no common language of trut and mo-rality, is, ultimately, to rob bot groups of teir umanity. —Stepen Spender,World witin World
No incommensurability [is] absolute —Barbara Herrnstein Smit,Belief and Resistance
Te Englis term ‘incommensurable’ is somewat unfortunate. —Sir Karl Popper,Te Open Society and Its Enemies
Contents
Part I: Incommensurability, Rhetoric1 1 Introduction3 Randy Allen Harris 2 Three Biographies: Kuhn, Feyerabend, and Incommensurability150 Paul Hoyningen-Huene
Part II: Issues177 3 Kuhn’s Incommensurability179 Alan G. Gross 4 Incommensurate Boundaries: The Rhetorical Positivism of Thomas Huxley198 Tomas M. Lessl 5 The Rhetoric of Philosophical Incommensurability238 Herbert W. Simons
Part III: Cases269 6 Science and Civil Debate: The Case of Sociobiology271 Lea Ceccarelli
vii
viii
Contents
7 Stasis and the Problem of Incommensurate Communication: The Case of Spousal Violence Research294 Lawrence J. Prelli 8 The ‘Anxiety of Influence’—Hermeneutic Rhetoric and the Triumph of Darwin’s Invention over Incommensurability334 Jon Angus Campbell 9 Cell and Membrane: The Rhetorical Strategies of a Marginalized View391 Jeanne Fanestock 10 Measuring Incommensurability: Are Toxicology and Ecotoxicology Blind to What the Other Sees?424 Carles Bazerman and René Agustín De los Santos 11 Novelty and Heresy in the Debate on Nonthermal Effects of Electromagnetic Fields464 Carolyn R. Miller References507 Index553
Preface
Witin te compreensibility casm lies te condition of incommensurability. —Carolyn R. Miller, “Retoric and Community” Te incommensurability tesis represents te most profound prob-lem facing retoric—of science, surely, but of any symbolic encounter, any attempt to cooperate, find common ground, get along, make bet-ter knowledge and build better societies. It’s too big and too deep for me. So I invited te smartest, most clear-eyed retoricians I know—of science and of any symbolic encounter—and an equally gifted pi-losoper, to elp me wrestle wit it. Te result is tis book, wic, and-to-my-eart, you will find seriously illuminating about te way scientists and oter value-olders acieve or fail to acieve sared un-derstandings. I would like to tank, first of all, tese brilliant and good-earted professors. Even te customary dog-work of copy editing and proof reading as been a joy on tis project, as I got to read and re-read te paradigms tey crafted, learning someting new on every pass; and watcing tose essays come togeter in te first place was a lesson in scolarly collegiality I ope never to forget. In addition to elp from tese model scolars, I ave been very lucky in te range of support and feedback I ave ad in working troug te problems of incommensurability, starting wit my one unfailing source of insigts and callenges, te students at te University of Wa-terloo. My contact wit nearly all of tem over te course of tis project as been tremendously rewarding, but a small group of tem deserve an extra measure of gratitude for specific elp wit various aspects of tis book: Jim Brookes, Jacqueline Cioreanu, Paul Clifford, Ryan Devitt, Zarsees Diveca, Olga Gladkova, David Hoff, Kim Honey-
ix