6 ms·

>If two "experts" can look at the same evidence and come to entirely different conclusions, how is this science? Scientism is a mental disease perpetuated by p

>If two "experts" can look at the same evidence and come to entirely different conclusions, how is this science? Scientism is a mental disease perpetuated by people who seek social persuasion through whatever means convinces a person/the public rather than objective epidemiologically derived truth. It's easier to appear smart by accepting dubious "science" than rebuking it with skepticism.

handedness 10y ago
What's more, the scientific field is full of (actual) experts looking at identical evidence, yet coming to different conclusions. That's the nature of inquiry. The systematic enterprise that we refer to as "science" is inductive in nature far more often than most adherents to scientism tend to realize. Even deductive conclusions are ultimately reached with nearly endless (and often unstated or unrealized) assumptions, and assumptions don't always turn out to be correct.
- simonh 10y ago
  But science is about creating and using tests for those assumptions. That's the part of the process that makes it science, as against philosophy.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
CalChris 10y ago
Disease is going a bit far. Excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge and techniques https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/scientism https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/scientism Or to put it another way, too much logical positivism. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientism http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism
devonkim 10y ago
The worst part is that we see people attempting to refute good science with poor science because of almost entirely political reasons such as the fact we're still having debates on the mere existence of climate change and unsupported or entirely debunked fears of GMOs and nuclear power. Even worse, I don't think teaching science better in our schools will do anything to change this status quo due to the huge amounts of money poured into political agendas.
- syshum 10y ago
  >>I don't think teaching science better It is not about teaching science better, it is about teaching critical thinking at all. Schools, especially primary schools, are devoted to conformity, social acceptance, and political correctness They do not teach people to be critical of those in authority, or power. This drives out the required critical thinking a person needs when they hear dissent on climate change, or how GMO's will be the end of humanity instead they just accept it as fact because a person of authority in their lives(be it a politician, preacher, or even simply an older adult they look up to) has told them it is fact so it is fact.
  - lsmarigo 10y ago
    Schools, especially primary schools, are devoted to conformity, social acceptance, and political correctness Bingo and well said! We condition our kids to accept everything they read in their textbooks as fact. Critical thinking is key and missing. When I was in grade 3 on MLK day our teacher split our class into 'races' by eye color and gave blue eyes treats made the brown eyes do work, it's a known/controversial exercise meant to teach about discrimination, which it did, but also it made us question authority. We should create exercises where teachers/staff purposely present incorrect or conflicting information to students, forcing them to regularly question the quality of the information and the motivations/agenda of the source.
    - fdgdasfadsf 10y ago
      In the UK basic level the English language exam sat by all 16 year olds did used to do this to some limited extent (you were given an advert and had to analyse it in terms of how it tried to persuade you etc).

handedness 10y ago

What's more, the scientific field is full of (actual) experts looking at identical evidence, yet coming to different conclusions. That's the nature of inquiry. The systematic enterprise that we refer to as "science" is inductive in nature far more often than most adherents to scientism tend to realize. Even deductive conclusions are ultimately reached with nearly endless (and often unstated or unrealized) assumptions, and assumptions don't always turn out to be correct.

simonh 10y ago
But science is about creating and using tests for those assumptions. That's the part of the process that makes it science, as against philosophy.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

CalChris 10y ago

Disease is going a bit far. Excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge and techniques https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/scientism https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/scientism Or to put it another way, too much logical positivism. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientism http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism

devonkim 10y ago

The worst part is that we see people attempting to refute good science with poor science because of almost entirely political reasons such as the fact we're still having debates on the mere existence of climate change and unsupported or entirely debunked fears of GMOs and nuclear power. Even worse, I don't think teaching science better in our schools will do anything to change this status quo due to the huge amounts of money poured into political agendas.

syshum 10y ago
>>I don't think teaching science better It is not about teaching science better, it is about teaching critical thinking at all. Schools, especially primary schools, are devoted to conformity, social acceptance, and political correctness They do not teach people to be critical of those in authority, or power. This drives out the required critical thinking a person needs when they hear dissent on climate change, or how GMO's will be the end of humanity instead they just accept it as fact because a person of authority in their lives(be it a politician, preacher, or even simply an older adult they look up to) has told them it is fact so it is fact.
- lsmarigo 10y ago
  Schools, especially primary schools, are devoted to conformity, social acceptance, and political correctness Bingo and well said! We condition our kids to accept everything they read in their textbooks as fact. Critical thinking is key and missing. When I was in grade 3 on MLK day our teacher split our class into 'races' by eye color and gave blue eyes treats made the brown eyes do work, it's a known/controversial exercise meant to teach about discrimination, which it did, but also it made us question authority. We should create exercises where teachers/staff purposely present incorrect or conflicting information to students, forcing them to regularly question the quality of the information and the motivations/agenda of the source.
  - fdgdasfadsf 10y ago
    In the UK basic level the English language exam sat by all 16 year olds did used to do this to some limited extent (you were given an advert and had to analyse it in terms of how it tried to persuade you etc).