3 ms·
> Its also broadly agreed on by sciencists Science is not based on agreement or consensus, it is based on evidence. Arguing that there's scientific agreement o
by toenail 2y ago
> Its also broadly agreed on by sciencists
Science is not based on agreement or consensus, it is based on evidence. Arguing that there's scientific agreement or consensus for anything is anti-scientific.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- threatofrain 2y ago> Arguing that there's scientific agreement or consensus for anything is anti-scientific. Do you imagine that in a world of scientific men and women engaging in empiricism, we should disregard the agreement in our discussions and simply rediscover medical science again and again from ground zero? We're going to tell patients "Oh, wait a few lifetimes, we're busy reconfirming everything because credibility and consensus is anti-scientific." That's what it means to disregard consensus. At some point you have to trust an entire discipline of professionals if you want to do Enormous Scale Medicine, not just singular pinpoint arguments or results.