3 ms·

> So if something is considered by people from different fields as true, then it likely is. This is actually very unscientific, a good chunk of what we current

> So if something is considered by people from different fields as true, then it likely is. This is actually very unscientific, a good chunk of what we currently hold to be true within science disproved previous science. A good example of really strong, good and useful science that was later replaced is Newtonian mechanics. In reality, science is never finished, but the prevailing view throughout time is "we have most of it figured out" and time and time again this is proven false. Hopefully it continues to be. And it might not be comforting to confront, but yes, the vast majority of people's belief in science is not analytical or rational, it is dogmatic. It doesn't mean the particular scientific things people believe are wrong, but most people, even scientists themselves, hold a lot of beliefs dogmatically and the idea that it is rational is protection of the ego and comparable to belief in divine wisdom.

gandalfgreybeer 5y ago
You only highlighted one sentence of what I said but left out the part where I said: > if new data is put forward then it can adjust. Which is essentially the same as the ideas you put forward. Also, coming from a Physics background, I would argue that to say that Newtonian mechanics has been completely replaced is false. There are more accurate models of the universe especially as we go to a quantum level or levels approaching the speed of light, but for most models it still works. As the saying goes, “all models are wrong, but some models are more useful than others”. Newtonian mechanics still works, but it doesn’t work all the time. But main thing is, we are in agreement that Science is not finished; there is a balance between being open to knowing that there might be a better model compared to what we know now, but until it disproves what we know now (or explains things out current models can’t and can be verified experimentally), there is no reason to not trust our currently accepted and verified ones.

gandalfgreybeer 5y ago

You only highlighted one sentence of what I said but left out the part where I said: > if new data is put forward then it can adjust. Which is essentially the same as the ideas you put forward. Also, coming from a Physics background, I would argue that to say that Newtonian mechanics has been completely replaced is false. There are more accurate models of the universe especially as we go to a quantum level or levels approaching the speed of light, but for most models it still works. As the saying goes, “all models are wrong, but some models are more useful than others”. Newtonian mechanics still works, but it doesn’t work all the time. But main thing is, we are in agreement that Science is not finished; there is a balance between being open to knowing that there might be a better model compared to what we know now, but until it disproves what we know now (or explains things out current models can’t and can be verified experimentally), there is no reason to not trust our currently accepted and verified ones.