This series of three newspaper columns by Olavo de Carvalho was collected in this order in the book “The Minimum You Need To Know So As Not To Be An Idiot”.
“Science against Reason” critically examines the modern understanding of “science” as the ultimate authority in all matters, arguing that science is not a self-sustaining entity but rather a specialized subset of human rational capacity. The article highlights the inability of science to define fundamental terms like “yes” and “no,” which are grounded in human moral responsibility and experience, not in scientific reasoning. It points out that many terms essential to scientific methodology, like “equality,” “difference,” “cause,” and “relation,” cannot be defined by science itself but rely on conventional meanings derived from human experience. Furthermore, the article asserts that science cannot transcend the limits of reason, as it is rooted in human experience and the contrast between the finite and the infinite. It criticizes the blind reliance on scientific authority in public debates, viewing it as an escape from the responsibilities of using reason. The piece concludes by illustrating the inconsistency of those who advocate for science, oscillating between relativism and absolutism, thus undermining the true essence of rational thought.
“Dreaming of the Ultimate Theory” discusses the concept of a perfect logical proof and its implications in the realm of scientific theories. It argues that while a perfect logical proof exists only in an ideal domain and not in real-world realities, the pursuit of a “final theory” in science — a unified explanation of nature and human existence — continues. The article critiques this pursuit by highlighting historical examples where scientific theories were interpreted as near-perfect logical proofs and applied beyond their scientific boundaries, leading to ideological and often destructive consequences. It points to the mechanistic interpretation of Newton’s principles, the societal applications of Darwin’s evolutionary theory, and the political implementation of Marxism as instances where scientific ideas were extended to justify actions like social reform, genocide, and totalitarian regimes. Olavo suggests that the enthusiastic quest for a final theory in science, with its potential ideological implications, might not bode well for humanity.
“Why I’m Not a Fan of Charles Darwin” presents a critical view of Charles Darwin and the celebration of his work. Olavo argues that Darwin did not invent the theory of evolution but rather adapted it from pre-existing ideas and his grandfather’s work. The piece criticizes Darwin’s concept of natural selection, contrasting it with the current understanding of random evolutionary changes (neo-Darwinism). It also suggests that Darwin himself was the progenitor of the “intelligent design” theory, a notion often rejected by his followers. The article goes further to accuse Darwinism of inherently supporting genocidal and racist ideologies, citing Darwin’s own writings as evidence. It concludes by questioning the idolization of Darwin, arguing that his scientific reputation is based on misinterpretations and contradictions of his actual beliefs and theories.
