4 ms·

I don't think there's necessarily a big difference. Let's take the political belief "women should be allowed to vote". Do you truly believe that it's valuable t

by lhc- 12y ago

I don't think there's necessarily a big difference. Let's take the political belief "women should be allowed to vote". Do you truly believe that it's valuable to have a diverse set of opinions on that subject? False equivalence in scientific opinion isn't any different from the political sphere, its just that many political issues are actually more highly debated because of a lack of hard science behind them.

jerf 12y ago
Strawman; it is not the "conservative" position of a significant sized group of people that "women should not be allowed to vote". Non-zero, sure, but before you get too excited about that "concession" bear in mind I can find examples of people who think men should not be allowed to vote, in academia. Further, still a flawed argument; part of the main point of science is to consider questions that may be emotionally loaded or painful in a scientific manner. Forbidding certain streams of thought because it could conceivably be used to support a politically unpopular position is unscientific. At the very least you ought to acknowledge that is the case, rather than try to pretend that you have not somehow left science behind, and pretend that you will suffer no consequences from that because of the sheer, self-evident rightness of your beliefs. (And if those last six words don't at least make you pause, you don't have a scientific mind.)