3 ms·

the difference is that smart people can cloak such proscriptions in pseudo science (see: happiness research) and a lot of people don't have the expertise to deb

the difference is that smart people can cloak such proscriptions in pseudo science (see: happiness research) and a lot of people don't have the expertise to debunk them. edit: jerf13 is making this point better than I am.

KirinDave 17y ago
> the difference is that smart people can cloak such proscriptions in pseudo science (see: happiness research)" How is that any different from cloaking the prescriptions (or proscriptions, I suppose) in biblical claptrap? Or historical or cultural nonsense? A lot of people believe things are in the bible that are actually not there, at best. Why? Their minister told them. I was one of these people in my youth; I assure you it happens. Personally, I think this is a classic example of anti-intellectualism. A lot of people get angry arguing with "smart" people because they seem to have "an answer for everything." This is far more infuriating to deal with than the relatively static arguments of Wu Proponents or Creationists, who simply reiterate the same tired nonsense over and over until you can simply ignore it the way you do any droning, repetitious sound.
- nazgulnarsil 17y ago
  you honestly don't see a difference between something that is backed up by "well that's what we believe" and "I have compiled statistics that prove my point!". I have the training to debunk their nonsense, but the vast majority don't. how many crap medical studies come out each year due to bad statistical methods combined with FDA corruption? this has a much bigger impact on the average person's life than religious nuts spouting off. The authority of the FDA and pharmas derives from their panels of scientific experts.
  - KirinDave 17y ago
    > you honestly don't see a difference between something that is backed up by "well that's what we believe" and "I have compiled statistics that prove my point!". I have the training to debunk their nonsense, but the vast majority don't. You left out the part after "well that's what we believe" where they say "because...". Usually that's what gets people. And I grew up around people from whom the existence of math and statistics for something almost guarantee'd they dispute it. Perhaps you find the scientific claptrap more ugly because you understand it better, but science and pseudoscience are far from the biggest masters of people's lives in the wide world. > how many crap medical studies come out each year due to bad statistical methods combined with FDA corruption? this has a much bigger impact on the average person's life than religious nuts spouting off. There are these countries–incredibly populous countries–where one dude spouting off religious nonsense is the literal law of the land. You disagree? You die or are imprisoned indefinitely.

KirinDave 17y ago

> the difference is that smart people can cloak such proscriptions in pseudo science (see: happiness research)" How is that any different from cloaking the prescriptions (or proscriptions, I suppose) in biblical claptrap? Or historical or cultural nonsense? A lot of people believe things are in the bible that are actually not there, at best. Why? Their minister told them. I was one of these people in my youth; I assure you it happens. Personally, I think this is a classic example of anti-intellectualism. A lot of people get angry arguing with "smart" people because they seem to have "an answer for everything." This is far more infuriating to deal with than the relatively static arguments of Wu Proponents or Creationists, who simply reiterate the same tired nonsense over and over until you can simply ignore it the way you do any droning, repetitious sound.

nazgulnarsil 17y ago
you honestly don't see a difference between something that is backed up by "well that's what we believe" and "I have compiled statistics that prove my point!". I have the training to debunk their nonsense, but the vast majority don't. how many crap medical studies come out each year due to bad statistical methods combined with FDA corruption? this has a much bigger impact on the average person's life than religious nuts spouting off. The authority of the FDA and pharmas derives from their panels of scientific experts.
- KirinDave 17y ago
  > you honestly don't see a difference between something that is backed up by "well that's what we believe" and "I have compiled statistics that prove my point!". I have the training to debunk their nonsense, but the vast majority don't. You left out the part after "well that's what we believe" where they say "because...". Usually that's what gets people. And I grew up around people from whom the existence of math and statistics for something almost guarantee'd they dispute it. Perhaps you find the scientific claptrap more ugly because you understand it better, but science and pseudoscience are far from the biggest masters of people's lives in the wide world. > how many crap medical studies come out each year due to bad statistical methods combined with FDA corruption? this has a much bigger impact on the average person's life than religious nuts spouting off. There are these countries–incredibly populous countries–where one dude spouting off religious nonsense is the literal law of the land. You disagree? You die or are imprisoned indefinitely.