4 ms·

I think he addresses this a little at the bottom with “I do have a problem with people who claim to have done SCIENCE and then when you dig in, turn out to have

by celoyd 16y ago

I think he addresses this a little at the bottom with “I do have a problem with people who claim to have done SCIENCE and then when you dig in, turn out to have done no such thing.” Calling something science is pretty much the way of giving it prestige these days. This is bad for the reputation of science, but it’s also bad for the reputation of useful non-scientific kinds of knowledge. Lots of good advice isn’t clearly falsifiable or rigorously research-based.

chime 16y ago
> Lots of good advice isn’t clearly falsifiable or rigorously research-based. And I have absolutely no problem with that. When my dad told me "son, you don't have to step into every puddle to know you'll get wet," I didn't need a rigorous proof of the statement. When my wife says "wash the canned beans & chick peas before you cook them" I do it without asking (as I have been trained to).
- frossie 16y ago
  Well I certainly don't feel like that. Cooking only became interesting to me when I realized there are real answers to the "why do it like that" question. Why rinse the chick peas? To wash away preservatives? Because the slime is off-putting? Because the extra starch will otherwise over-thicken the dish? Dude, how can you NOT want to know?
sliverstorm 16y ago
Calling something 'science' actually fell out of vogue just a few short years ago. I believe 'organic' is the new way. I just heard what I was told was 'organic music' yesterday. (I started to wonder what this meant. Obviously sound waves are not composed of organic OR non-organic molecules besides perhaps air, so perhaps we should fall back to the commercial definition. Did they grow the wood for their violins without pesticides, and use sustainability grown trees for their sheet music? Or do they include DRM that prevents them from being played on stereos powered with anything other than solar?)
rfrey 16y ago
Agreed that many people claiming "SCIANCE!" don't really know what science is. Most scientists don't, either. That's not meant as a slam against all those other scientists who just aren't as smart as brilliant ol' me. Interest in epistemology is different than a passion for protein folding, and one can effectively apply the methods without diving deep into the philosophy. In the New Organon , (wherein Francis Bacon basically invented the scientific method IMHO), Bacon outright says there will be millions of ground soldiers applying science to the world without understanding deeply the epistemology of their actions. He saw that as natural and unavoidable considering how foreign, unnatural, and downright unpleasant the scientific worldview is to a normal human being. Experience seems to bear out his prediction - in fact, all we have is gradations in the ability to apply scientific thinking. Nobody does it all the time.

by celoyd 16y ago

chime 16y ago

> Lots of good advice isn’t clearly falsifiable or rigorously research-based. And I have absolutely no problem with that. When my dad told me "son, you don't have to step into every puddle to know you'll get wet," I didn't need a rigorous proof of the statement. When my wife says "wash the canned beans & chick peas before you cook them" I do it without asking (as I have been trained to).

frossie 16y ago
Well I certainly don't feel like that. Cooking only became interesting to me when I realized there are real answers to the "why do it like that" question. Why rinse the chick peas? To wash away preservatives? Because the slime is off-putting? Because the extra starch will otherwise over-thicken the dish? Dude, how can you NOT want to know?

sliverstorm 16y ago

Calling something 'science' actually fell out of vogue just a few short years ago. I believe 'organic' is the new way. I just heard what I was told was 'organic music' yesterday. (I started to wonder what this meant. Obviously sound waves are not composed of organic OR non-organic molecules besides perhaps air, so perhaps we should fall back to the commercial definition. Did they grow the wood for their violins without pesticides, and use sustainability grown trees for their sheet music? Or do they include DRM that prevents them from being played on stereos powered with anything other than solar?)

rfrey 16y ago

Agreed that many people claiming "SCIANCE!" don't really know what science is. Most scientists don't, either. That's not meant as a slam against all those other scientists who just aren't as smart as brilliant ol' me. Interest in epistemology is different than a passion for protein folding, and one can effectively apply the methods without diving deep into the philosophy. In the New Organon , (wherein Francis Bacon basically invented the scientific method IMHO), Bacon outright says there will be millions of ground soldiers applying science to the world without understanding deeply the epistemology of their actions. He saw that as natural and unavoidable considering how foreign, unnatural, and downright unpleasant the scientific worldview is to a normal human being. Experience seems to bear out his prediction - in fact, all we have is gradations in the ability to apply scientific thinking. Nobody does it all the time.