4 ms·

If astrology people understood science they wouldn’t be astrologists Glad we have something to point to finally as a reference

CuriouslyC 2y ago
The problem is all the "scientific" fields that are nearly as high on the bullshit quotient as astrology that we stubbornly continue to defend.
- meroes 2y ago
  Can we pinpoint a specific decade this happened or is it a slow process? Because if we count CS as a science, I’m seeing it become just like the worst of the sciences in this regard. AI has really gotten me pessimistic. There’s so much borrowing from other subjects since there are now models for every subject and every grade level, which ultimately will become products for large corporations. Like maybe we should hire at least one full time linguist, mathematician, chemist, logician, etc to sit high in the chain behind each of the respective models. I’m seeing a lot of faux rigor because it’s moving lightning speed.
  - CuriouslyC 2y ago
    I've only had an inside view of academia since the mid aughts, but it was already a well established issue then with departments trying to institute p-hacking controls and citation rings being a known thing. I think a big part of why it's exploding so hard is the scarcity of academic jobs combined with the big push to increase STEM PhD production leaving people to a cutthroat competition, where you have to either cheat or be absolutely brilliant to have a real shot at a tenured position.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  Which fields do you have in mind, other than... doctors, apparently?
  - CuriouslyC 2y ago
    Sociology, psychology, biology, political science, economics oh man does the list go on... If you spend time supporting scientists in doing statistics and research methodology for any amount of time you will see the emperor has absolutely no clothes.
  - AndrewKemendo 2y ago
    Physicists, Civil Engineers, mathematicians…
- AndrewKemendo 2y ago
  Physics and Chemistry have no problems with defining and testing hypotheses

CuriouslyC 2y ago

The problem is all the "scientific" fields that are nearly as high on the bullshit quotient as astrology that we stubbornly continue to defend.

meroes 2y ago
Can we pinpoint a specific decade this happened or is it a slow process? Because if we count CS as a science, I’m seeing it become just like the worst of the sciences in this regard. AI has really gotten me pessimistic. There’s so much borrowing from other subjects since there are now models for every subject and every grade level, which ultimately will become products for large corporations. Like maybe we should hire at least one full time linguist, mathematician, chemist, logician, etc to sit high in the chain behind each of the respective models. I’m seeing a lot of faux rigor because it’s moving lightning speed.
- CuriouslyC 2y ago
  I've only had an inside view of academia since the mid aughts, but it was already a well established issue then with departments trying to institute p-hacking controls and citation rings being a known thing. I think a big part of why it's exploding so hard is the scarcity of academic jobs combined with the big push to increase STEM PhD production leaving people to a cutthroat competition, where you have to either cheat or be absolutely brilliant to have a real shot at a tenured position.
Dylan16807 2y ago
Which fields do you have in mind, other than... doctors, apparently?
- CuriouslyC 2y ago
  Sociology, psychology, biology, political science, economics oh man does the list go on... If you spend time supporting scientists in doing statistics and research methodology for any amount of time you will see the emperor has absolutely no clothes.
- AndrewKemendo 2y ago
  Physicists, Civil Engineers, mathematicians…
AndrewKemendo 2y ago
Physics and Chemistry have no problems with defining and testing hypotheses