> Science can tell us what actions will lead to what outcomes, but it can't tell us what outcomes we should aim for. I'm really disappointed to see anti-intell

> Science can tell us what actions will lead to what outcomes, but it can't tell us what outcomes we should aim for. I'm really disappointed to see anti-intellectual nonsense like this on HN. Science can be positive and normative, when it needs to be. Maybe people do have different preferences, but there are objective, universal goals that benefit 99.9% of people and improve their quality of life. We are content with a minority in a democracy not getting their way when their candidates lose, but suddenly, in science, if 0.1%'s preferences aren't exactly in line with the rest, it's a grave offense? Fresh water, heat, electricity, all available as many hours a day as possible aren't objective goals? Is there a person on this planet that would refuse a washing machine or a refrigerator? Please. > Trying to push a certain set of values like this risks giving science a bad name in the public eye, and making the public less willing to accept actual scientific facts. The only thing trying to give science a bad name here is your comment, through inventing unreasonable and ever-moving goalposts, hiding behind individual preferences of people.