3 ms·
I don't like the science-bro movement, but I also think they might fill an important niche. The anti-science movement has too many people and too much time and
by jjoonathan 6y ago
I don't like the science-bro movement, but I also think they might fill an important niche. The anti-science movement has too many people and too much time and too high of a (answer time / question time) gish-gallop ratio for scientists to possibly engage with. If scientists try to fight the anti-science crowd, they will lose.
Science bros, for all their faults, can trade blows on more even footing, and that's something. Perhaps even a vitally important something. Even if science bros aren't great at science proper, their contribution to societal consensus formation might be as important as the underlying science itself!
- bnralt 6y agoScience bros often misuse "anti-science" to try to shutdown opinions they disagree with. Hence people worried about the unlikely event of being killed by a nuclear power plant are anti-science, but people worried about the even more unlikely event of being killed by a super intelligent AI aren't. Misusing the word "science" (particularly by people who don't seem to have a good grasp on it) and turning it into a rhetorical cudgel is harmful, and pushes the idea that science is ideological.
- jjoonathan 6y agoDo you have an alternative for addressing the gish gallop issue? We agree that science bros have problems, but unless you have an alternative I see them as a net positive, and not by a small margin. Consensus formation is always messy, but that's not solved by losing.