4 ms·

> Do you actually get upset at flat earthers? People do. > faith based belief I think you're confusing faith and trust.

vorpalhex 5y ago
Most people who read science books (eg your average student) are not looking up the authors and calculating how often they make corrections, etc. It is faith. A good rule for whether something is trust or faith is whether you can make estimates on how wrong they are. Faith demands obedience, trust expects mistakes.
- guerrilla 5y ago
  They're trusting the authors of the science books who are presumably experts, the same way we trust experts for everything we're not experts in. The books also tend to include at least a little bit of reasoning and evidence as well, proof if it's a math book.
  - vorpalhex 5y ago
    If your "trust" is because they wrote a book that says "Science" on the cover and that they have "phd" by their name, you are engaged in faith. You are holding a bible. If you are weighing them against sources, if you are looking for mistakes, if you are evaluating that information against a wider context and you can accept there are absolutely going to be mistakes - now we are in a realm of trust. As a simple question: How do you know that expert isn't lying to you? How do you know they aren't wrong? Is the fact in question even (currently) determinable? There are parts of science that the current correct answer to is "We don't know". We have a lot more unknowns than knowns. Science is a process, not a result.
    - guerrilla 5y ago
      It's not because the book says Science, it's because you trust the teacher who chose the book to be more competent in the area for you than you are and that the book itself is convincing. > If you are weighing them against sources, if you are looking for mistakes, if you are evaluating that information against a wider context and you can accept there are absolutely going to be mistakes - now we are in a realm of trust. You're being ridiculous. You yourself have neither the competence nor time and energy to do this for 99% of the subjects int he world. You have to trust experts. > As a simple question: How do you know that expert isn't lying to you? How do you know they aren't wrong? Is the fact in question even (currently) determinable? You don't. That's a risk you take in trusting them. They can and occasionally to betray you.
      - vorpalhex 5y ago
        > you trust the teacher who chose the book Districts usually select the books, based on publisher relationships. This is different in colleges, where your professor may be the author. Your teacher did not vet or select the book. > You yourself have neither the competence nor time and energy to do this for 99% of the subjects int he world. You can and should spot check texts, and peek into their authors. No, you can't fact check every single claim but you can check 1/20, and you should check anything that seems magical or surprising. As late as the 1970s, there were expert published books that suggested drinking and smoking during pregnancy were ok. We have had research since the 1930s that made it pretty clear it was dangerous. > You have to trust experts. You should verify, check and question your experts. If your doctor says surprising things to you, get a second opinion. If your science teacher tells you an invisible sky man made the Earth in 7 days, maybe check a few other science books. At the end of the day the burden is on you. Nobody else. If you take bad advice, only you and your loved ones suffer. You should also always know the "why". If you "trust" the world is round, you should understand how to check that (this is a great activity for kids). You should be able to explain why the sky is blue.
        guerrilla 5y ago
        > You should verify, check and question your experts As I said, you're being ridiculous, nobody has time, energy nor competence for that.
Jarwain 5y ago
Some people have a trust-based relationship with science, where they analyze the evidence and Develop that trust. Maybe a better word in this circumstance would be "evidence-based" I'm sure there are others with a faith-based relationship to science.

Most people who read science books (eg your average student) are not looking up the authors and calculating how often they make corrections, etc. It is faith. A good rule for whether something is trust or faith is whether you can make estimates on how wrong they are. Faith demands obedience, trust expects mistakes.

guerrilla 5y ago
They're trusting the authors of the science books who are presumably experts, the same way we trust experts for everything we're not experts in. The books also tend to include at least a little bit of reasoning and evidence as well, proof if it's a math book.
- vorpalhex 5y ago
  If your "trust" is because they wrote a book that says "Science" on the cover and that they have "phd" by their name, you are engaged in faith. You are holding a bible. If you are weighing them against sources, if you are looking for mistakes, if you are evaluating that information against a wider context and you can accept there are absolutely going to be mistakes - now we are in a realm of trust. As a simple question: How do you know that expert isn't lying to you? How do you know they aren't wrong? Is the fact in question even (currently) determinable? There are parts of science that the current correct answer to is "We don't know". We have a lot more unknowns than knowns. Science is a process, not a result.
  - guerrilla 5y ago
    It's not because the book says Science, it's because you trust the teacher who chose the book to be more competent in the area for you than you are and that the book itself is convincing. > If you are weighing them against sources, if you are looking for mistakes, if you are evaluating that information against a wider context and you can accept there are absolutely going to be mistakes - now we are in a realm of trust. You're being ridiculous. You yourself have neither the competence nor time and energy to do this for 99% of the subjects int he world. You have to trust experts. > As a simple question: How do you know that expert isn't lying to you? How do you know they aren't wrong? Is the fact in question even (currently) determinable? You don't. That's a risk you take in trusting them. They can and occasionally to betray you.
    - vorpalhex 5y ago
      > you trust the teacher who chose the book Districts usually select the books, based on publisher relationships. This is different in colleges, where your professor may be the author. Your teacher did not vet or select the book. > You yourself have neither the competence nor time and energy to do this for 99% of the subjects int he world. You can and should spot check texts, and peek into their authors. No, you can't fact check every single claim but you can check 1/20, and you should check anything that seems magical or surprising. As late as the 1970s, there were expert published books that suggested drinking and smoking during pregnancy were ok. We have had research since the 1930s that made it pretty clear it was dangerous. > You have to trust experts. You should verify, check and question your experts. If your doctor says surprising things to you, get a second opinion. If your science teacher tells you an invisible sky man made the Earth in 7 days, maybe check a few other science books. At the end of the day the burden is on you. Nobody else. If you take bad advice, only you and your loved ones suffer. You should also always know the "why". If you "trust" the world is round, you should understand how to check that (this is a great activity for kids). You should be able to explain why the sky is blue.
      - guerrilla 5y ago
        > You should verify, check and question your experts As I said, you're being ridiculous, nobody has time, energy nor competence for that.

Jarwain 5y ago

Some people have a trust-based relationship with science, where they analyze the evidence and Develop that trust. Maybe a better word in this circumstance would be "evidence-based" I'm sure there are others with a faith-based relationship to science.