5 ms·
You can always spot someone who has near zero comprehension of science as soon as they speak about "belief in science".
by smohare 10y ago
You can always spot someone who has near zero comprehension of science as soon as they speak about "belief in science".
- PhasmaFelis 10y agoCan you, personally, demonstrate that the atomic theory of matter is accurate? Maybe you can, I dunno, but most of us can't. We've had it explained in a way that makes at least superficial sense, but we don't grasp it on a deep level. Yet we accept it as true. We trust that the people who really did the research knew what they were doing. We believe it. What would you call that?
- eveningcoffee 10y agoThe difference is that if you really wanted, you could.
- sideshowb 10y agoCareful. For sure, Science, unlike dogma, prides itself on changing belief in the face of conflicting evidence. In theory, anyway. In practice, I have a PhD in Computer Science and Geography. Do I understand climate models? No, they're not my field. Do I have the time to verify them? Certainly not. How do I know then that the field of climate science is getting it right? I have to trust the institutional process, which as Kuhn points out is far from perfect. If they're getting it wrong, it's not likely to be me that figures it out, so for the time being the rational course of action is to accept the consensus of experts. tldr; belief in science. Though cynically speaking you're right, people who trot out that phrase usually don't understand the above.
- mikelyons 10y agoYou can always spot someone who has near zero comprehension of the mechanics of belief when they don't think it applies to science: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FtVLnmuJzg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FtVLnmuJzg