14 ms·
One of the problems with the “defend science” movement is that it’s often being (mis)-used to support philosophical positions that are fundamentally unanswerabl
by throwaway713 7y ago
One of the problems with the “defend science” movement is that it’s often being (mis)-used to support philosophical positions that are fundamentally unanswerable by science: concepts like afterlife, gender, and when life begins. I’m not saying I disagree with the popular viewpoints, but science is the wrong tool for the job. (Does human life have inherent value? I don’t know, but better predictive models and more experimentation isn’t going to answer that question.)
- hackeraccount 7y agoYes. I think it's an easy trap to use the word "Science" to defend political decisions. It seems an unassailable argument "Who would reject Science?" Don't you believe. You won't convince people your politics are rational - you'll convince people science is arbitrary.
- Numberwang 7y agoI think your philosophical position that those questions are unanswerable by science is part of the problem. We need more science education and popularization of its tools for solving problems.
- torstenvl 7y agoWhen life begins is clearly a scientific question. Perhaps you mean the question of when society should recognize and protect personhood?
- jonhendry18 7y agoAfterlife? You're talking nonsense.