2 ms·

Science: Merely an habit of mine of writing things upper case. Well, you're overthinking, really. I understand. People tend to to that a lot this days. Terms,

Science: Merely an habit of mine of writing things upper case. Well, you're overthinking, really. I understand. People tend to to that a lot this days. Terms, meanings etc, so many things. I only said in my original post that the resistance to change and thinking outside of the norm is as prevalent in science as is in religion. I'm not attacking or defending anything really. They're human, institutions, and so they're fallible;

eesmith 7y ago
Perhaps the charge can be reversed, and you are underthinking? I was calling you out for your both-siderism. I still am. Two switch out of having only two camps, I pose this variants: Is resistance to change and thinking outside of the norm as prevalent in physics as it is in phrenology? I think empirical evidence shows that phrenology - "measuring the contour of the skull can predict personality traits" to quote Wikipedia - is pure bunkum. Therefore, I think that anyone who holds that opinion does so from dogmatic faith. But your both-siderism suggests that phrenologists are no more dogmatic than physicists. Which I disagree with - see my earlier examples where physicists rejected earlier widely-held views given evidence to the contrary. My conclusion is that different institutions have different levels of dogmatism, so a claim of equivalence cannot easily be made without some sort of basis for the claim. As another example, I think that as an institution evolutionary psychology has a higher level of dogmatism than solid state physics, and as evidence I can point to articles like "Is Evolutionary Psychology Possible?" by Subrena E. Smith, doi:10.1007/s13752-019-00336-4 and the lack of corresponding articles for solid state physics.
- rafaelvasco 7y ago
  Well, shall we go our separate ways in our way of thinking then. Neither I or you are wrong. I'm just seeing the forest and you the tree.

eesmith 7y ago

Perhaps the charge can be reversed, and you are underthinking? I was calling you out for your both-siderism. I still am. Two switch out of having only two camps, I pose this variants: Is resistance to change and thinking outside of the norm as prevalent in physics as it is in phrenology? I think empirical evidence shows that phrenology - "measuring the contour of the skull can predict personality traits" to quote Wikipedia - is pure bunkum. Therefore, I think that anyone who holds that opinion does so from dogmatic faith. But your both-siderism suggests that phrenologists are no more dogmatic than physicists. Which I disagree with - see my earlier examples where physicists rejected earlier widely-held views given evidence to the contrary. My conclusion is that different institutions have different levels of dogmatism, so a claim of equivalence cannot easily be made without some sort of basis for the claim. As another example, I think that as an institution evolutionary psychology has a higher level of dogmatism than solid state physics, and as evidence I can point to articles like "Is Evolutionary Psychology Possible?" by Subrena E. Smith, doi:10.1007/s13752-019-00336-4 and the lack of corresponding articles for solid state physics.

rafaelvasco 7y ago
Well, shall we go our separate ways in our way of thinking then. Neither I or you are wrong. I'm just seeing the forest and you the tree.