4 ms·

Science is objective and there is a long history of morality and ethical changes, and incorrect evaluation to societal impact. I think this is a concesion to po

Science is objective and there is a long history of morality and ethical changes, and incorrect evaluation to societal impact. I think this is a concesion to political pressure.

AnHonestComment 6y ago
It’s 100% political. Like shadowbanning me for being an “inherent flame war”.
marcinzm 6y ago
>Science is objective Nothing done by humans is objective. Objective systems don't, for example, have massive reproducibility problems.
- linspace 6y ago
  Science cannot be trusted, right?
  - marcinzm 6y ago
    Please don't put words in my mouth. I simply said it is not objective. You can trust non-objective things and derive value from them. However in the end they are still biased.
- unishark 6y ago
  > Nothing done by humans is objective. This seems like a hyperbole. Obviously there is a lot of garbage that people claim to be science. But 2+2=4 is subjective?
  - kaitai 6y ago
    We are still humans interacting with and representing science/mathematics. Sure, 2+2=4, unless you're working base 3 or something, in which case you just have to be careful about your definitions. An easy caveat in hindsight but too often people take the truth they know and insist it's the only one. Just look at the debate over irrational numbers in the time of the Greeks -- they can't exists, claims one side, and as evidence they note that they can't represent them. Or imaginary numbers: they too can't exist. Or parallel lines that cross (what?). Or breaking the rules of calculus to get generalized functions. Basically one thing I love about math is you can take any statement/idea/construction, consider some opposite of it, and see if you can get something coherent out -- and often enough you do! I'm not saying that 2+2=4 or "you can't differentiate discontinuous functions" is subjective, per se, but it is in some sense a decision, a choice.

Science is objective and there is a long history of morality and ethical changes, and incorrect evaluation to societal impact. I think this is a concesion to political pressure.

AnHonestComment 6y ago

It’s 100% political. Like shadowbanning me for being an “inherent flame war”.

marcinzm 6y ago

>Science is objective Nothing done by humans is objective. Objective systems don't, for example, have massive reproducibility problems.

linspace 6y ago
Science cannot be trusted, right?
- marcinzm 6y ago
  Please don't put words in my mouth. I simply said it is not objective. You can trust non-objective things and derive value from them. However in the end they are still biased.
unishark 6y ago
> Nothing done by humans is objective. This seems like a hyperbole. Obviously there is a lot of garbage that people claim to be science. But 2+2=4 is subjective?
- kaitai 6y ago
  We are still humans interacting with and representing science/mathematics. Sure, 2+2=4, unless you're working base 3 or something, in which case you just have to be careful about your definitions. An easy caveat in hindsight but too often people take the truth they know and insist it's the only one. Just look at the debate over irrational numbers in the time of the Greeks -- they can't exists, claims one side, and as evidence they note that they can't represent them. Or imaginary numbers: they too can't exist. Or parallel lines that cross (what?). Or breaking the rules of calculus to get generalized functions. Basically one thing I love about math is you can take any statement/idea/construction, consider some opposite of it, and see if you can get something coherent out -- and often enough you do! I'm not saying that 2+2=4 or "you can't differentiate discontinuous functions" is subjective, per se, but it is in some sense a decision, a choice.