7 ms·

"There are no facts, only interpretations." - Nietzsche

zekica 5y ago
Scientific method tries to get as close as possible to facts. The issue is that popular press and "influencers" ignore limitations in studies and always tell just their interpretations while pointing to "the science".
- rory 5y ago
  Aside from interpretation, a major issue is the press and "influencers" selecting to promote studies that affirm their preconceived notions, and simply ignoring other studies that contradict them.
- Chris2048 5y ago
  It's not even limitations. It's studies that are non-peer reviewed, or non-replicated (not failed to replicate sometimes, just hasn't yet been replicated). Especially certain subjects where poor, biased, studies seem rife. They take a study and run with it because a scientific study is "science", even if a study is just one step one the way to an accepted truth. Sometimes is more explicit, cherry-picking certain studies over others; possibly even dismissing those with the "bad" result as biased (or *-ist).
  - BitwiseFool 5y ago
    Not all science is equal, either. A paper published in an evolutionary psychology journal is not as valid as the theory of evolution itself. Yet, we tend to lump everything in under "Science".
- Cthulhu_ 5y ago
  Tries to, but it too is flawed; misinterpretation of numbers, falsifying of numbers, publishing papers as a means to inflate one's own ego / CV, not publishing studies that don't look positive, and of course, companies and industries funding studies into the positive parts of their 'thing', see for example the campaign against 'fat' in the eighties (funded by the grain and sugar industries), being replaced with the campaign against sugar and carbs in the past two or so decades. I'm sure all of those studies had merit, had adequate numbers, were peer reviewed and everything... but they were still made with an Agenda, and worse, picked up by the mainstream media so that they could push lifestyle advice, diets, and promote one category of products over another. The "Truth" is in the middle, of course, and to make a completely opinion based and unscientific statement, too much of anything / overconsumption is a bad thing, but that's too vague a statement or advice; people like being told "avoid doing / eating this" and "do / eat that instead", sticking to simple rules as a lifestyle choice.
tgv 5y ago
Which in and of itself doesn't mean anything. At face value, it promotes extreme relativism, but contradicts itself. Nietzsche as the proto-edge-lord.
- blueflow 5y ago
  He is exactly right. The universe as it is and how we humans perceive it are two different worlds. Many words that we consider "abstract" are made up and have no equivalent in the physical universe, but we still use them because it fulfills some purpose for us.
  - tgv 5y ago
    > Many words that we consider "abstract" are made up What have you been smoking? All words are made up. But that isn't related to the question fact vs interpretation at all. The word "Earth" is made up, your name is made up, "human" is made up, the air that you breathe is made up, yet you are (most likely) a human on Earth, and you'd hate it if that air suddenly disappeared. Anyway, the quote contradicts itself/reduces itself to ravings of a lunatic, so isn't worth taking seriously.
    - blueflow 5y ago
      "Earth", "Air" and "Human" are not abstract nouns because they have physical things we can match those words to. Contrast that to abstract nouns like "truth", "danger" or "happiness", which are actually interpretations of something other. Statements using these tend to be opinions or non-verifiable. Fact-Checking doesn't work for them.
      - hunterb123 5y ago
        That supports what @tgv is saying, not the quote. > "There are no facts, only interpretations. Too absolute, some things are objective, some subjective. Not everything is subjective, like he's implying. The quote sounds deep, but it falls apart to 3rd grade reading comprehension.
dandanua 5y ago
[flagged]
- dang 5y ago
  Besides being flamebait and against the site guidelines, that's a painfully shallow dismissal, and we don't want those here. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
a_imho 5y ago
"I only believe in statistics that I doctored myself" - Winston S. Churchill
- dang 5y ago
  That's not an authentic quote. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill
  - Sinidir 5y ago
    "I only believe in quotes that i doctored myself" dang.

Scientific method tries to get as close as possible to facts. The issue is that popular press and "influencers" ignore limitations in studies and always tell just their interpretations while pointing to "the science".

rory 5y ago
Aside from interpretation, a major issue is the press and "influencers" selecting to promote studies that affirm their preconceived notions, and simply ignoring other studies that contradict them.
Chris2048 5y ago
It's not even limitations. It's studies that are non-peer reviewed, or non-replicated (not failed to replicate sometimes, just hasn't yet been replicated). Especially certain subjects where poor, biased, studies seem rife. They take a study and run with it because a scientific study is "science", even if a study is just one step one the way to an accepted truth. Sometimes is more explicit, cherry-picking certain studies over others; possibly even dismissing those with the "bad" result as biased (or *-ist).
- BitwiseFool 5y ago
  Not all science is equal, either. A paper published in an evolutionary psychology journal is not as valid as the theory of evolution itself. Yet, we tend to lump everything in under "Science".
Cthulhu_ 5y ago
Tries to, but it too is flawed; misinterpretation of numbers, falsifying of numbers, publishing papers as a means to inflate one's own ego / CV, not publishing studies that don't look positive, and of course, companies and industries funding studies into the positive parts of their 'thing', see for example the campaign against 'fat' in the eighties (funded by the grain and sugar industries), being replaced with the campaign against sugar and carbs in the past two or so decades. I'm sure all of those studies had merit, had adequate numbers, were peer reviewed and everything... but they were still made with an Agenda, and worse, picked up by the mainstream media so that they could push lifestyle advice, diets, and promote one category of products over another. The "Truth" is in the middle, of course, and to make a completely opinion based and unscientific statement, too much of anything / overconsumption is a bad thing, but that's too vague a statement or advice; people like being told "avoid doing / eating this" and "do / eat that instead", sticking to simple rules as a lifestyle choice.

tgv 5y ago

Which in and of itself doesn't mean anything. At face value, it promotes extreme relativism, but contradicts itself. Nietzsche as the proto-edge-lord.

blueflow 5y ago
He is exactly right. The universe as it is and how we humans perceive it are two different worlds. Many words that we consider "abstract" are made up and have no equivalent in the physical universe, but we still use them because it fulfills some purpose for us.
- tgv 5y ago
  > Many words that we consider "abstract" are made up What have you been smoking? All words are made up. But that isn't related to the question fact vs interpretation at all. The word "Earth" is made up, your name is made up, "human" is made up, the air that you breathe is made up, yet you are (most likely) a human on Earth, and you'd hate it if that air suddenly disappeared. Anyway, the quote contradicts itself/reduces itself to ravings of a lunatic, so isn't worth taking seriously.
  - blueflow 5y ago
    "Earth", "Air" and "Human" are not abstract nouns because they have physical things we can match those words to. Contrast that to abstract nouns like "truth", "danger" or "happiness", which are actually interpretations of something other. Statements using these tend to be opinions or non-verifiable. Fact-Checking doesn't work for them.
    - hunterb123 5y ago
      That supports what @tgv is saying, not the quote. > "There are no facts, only interpretations. Too absolute, some things are objective, some subjective. Not everything is subjective, like he's implying. The quote sounds deep, but it falls apart to 3rd grade reading comprehension.

dandanua 5y ago

[flagged]

dang 5y ago
Besides being flamebait and against the site guidelines, that's a painfully shallow dismissal, and we don't want those here. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

a_imho 5y ago

"I only believe in statistics that I doctored myself" - Winston S. Churchill

dang 5y ago
That's not an authentic quote. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill
- Sinidir 5y ago
  "I only believe in quotes that i doctored myself" dang.