3 ms·
I think as a civilization we have become more scientific and as a consequence, more reluctant to accept alternate truths which are not based on science. If some
by Memosyne 8y ago
I think as a civilization we have become more scientific and as a consequence, more reluctant to accept alternate truths which are not based on science. If someone could provide proof that the world is flat then their credibility would improve. However, since that proposition defies basic science, I would first have to be skeptical.
- beaconstudios 8y agoI think you're missing the point - you shouldn't censor ideas just because they are not credible. I can dig through to find my previous list of reasons why but this is the point that both myself and the other commenter are making. It's also at the core of free speech as a principle. Also, the idea that Western civilisation itself has gotten more scientific is both wishful, and imo would be a terrible thing if it did happen. We've just traded one appeal to authority (priests) for another (pop science promoters and journalists). Materialism is a great way to investigate natural phenomena but I would hate to live in a society that treats it as a moral principle.