4 ms·

> By relying on such tactics you are abandoning science. I don't think this is true. Science is a means of building knowledge via testable predictions. It's no

> By relying on such tactics you are abandoning science. I don't think this is true. Science is a means of building knowledge via testable predictions. It's not a promotional tool. It's unrealistic to expect that effective techniques for performing science will be at all effective for promoting science; in fact, we have ample evidence that trying to promote science via reasoned engagement doesn't work very well. Anti-scientific proponents of vaccine-avoidance or evolution-denial continue to gain the mindshare of a significant and powerful segment of the voting population that "better evidence" has been unable to sway.

InclinedPlane 16y ago
By "unable to sway" you mean "unable to sway everyone without any effort and with almost no delay". How many people believed in evolution in 1500? How many people believed the Sun was powered by nuclear fusion in 1900? It's possible to convince people of the value of scientific inquiry and the truth of the results of scientific research, but sometimes it takes a lot more time and effort than anyone would wish. On the plus side, we have it a lot easier than Galileo did. Our lives aren't in immediate danger merely because we challenge the dogma of powerful institutions.
- cromulent 16y ago
  The idea that Galileo's life was in danger is itself dogma. He put himself into trouble by using the Pope's views in the form of his bot Simplicio, embarrassing the Pope. He was in trouble, but not in physical danger. The irony is that the Church was open to heliocentrism, but demanded more scientific proof before teaching it.
  - InclinedPlane 16y ago
    Galileo was convicted of heresy, placed under house arrest for 9 years (until his death), and his books were banned. He could easily have been placed in prison rather than house arrest, at the whim of the Inquisition, the same Inquisition that executed Bruno 30 years prior and tortured and then imprisoned Campanella for 27 years. The idea that Galileo was never in any danger (assuming that one can write off house arrest as non-dangerous) is patently ridiculous.
    - cromulent 16y ago
      The point is that he wasn't in danger from challenging the dogma, as you asserted above. That is dogma itself. If he was in danger, it was from embarrassing the pope. He advanced helicentrism long before his heresy trial. The Pope met with him and said that he could write about Copernican theory. He was under house arrest for those years at the house of the Archbishop of Siena. It was a fairly nice life in those times. Galileo and the church got along very well, but they had to do something to save face for the Pope. I don't think it's ridiculous.

InclinedPlane 16y ago

By "unable to sway" you mean "unable to sway everyone without any effort and with almost no delay". How many people believed in evolution in 1500? How many people believed the Sun was powered by nuclear fusion in 1900? It's possible to convince people of the value of scientific inquiry and the truth of the results of scientific research, but sometimes it takes a lot more time and effort than anyone would wish. On the plus side, we have it a lot easier than Galileo did. Our lives aren't in immediate danger merely because we challenge the dogma of powerful institutions.

cromulent 16y ago
The idea that Galileo's life was in danger is itself dogma. He put himself into trouble by using the Pope's views in the form of his bot Simplicio, embarrassing the Pope. He was in trouble, but not in physical danger. The irony is that the Church was open to heliocentrism, but demanded more scientific proof before teaching it.
- InclinedPlane 16y ago
  Galileo was convicted of heresy, placed under house arrest for 9 years (until his death), and his books were banned. He could easily have been placed in prison rather than house arrest, at the whim of the Inquisition, the same Inquisition that executed Bruno 30 years prior and tortured and then imprisoned Campanella for 27 years. The idea that Galileo was never in any danger (assuming that one can write off house arrest as non-dangerous) is patently ridiculous.
  - cromulent 16y ago
    The point is that he wasn't in danger from challenging the dogma, as you asserted above. That is dogma itself. If he was in danger, it was from embarrassing the pope. He advanced helicentrism long before his heresy trial. The Pope met with him and said that he could write about Copernican theory. He was under house arrest for those years at the house of the Archbishop of Siena. It was a fairly nice life in those times. Galileo and the church got along very well, but they had to do something to save face for the Pope. I don't think it's ridiculous.