Science vs Scientism
- Thread starter AnalogPackrat
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
ruffrecords
Well-known member
Spiritworks
Well-known member
Valid points, more good links at the end of the article. Thanks
scott2000
Well-known member
Like a giant HOA
sahib
Well-known member
I do not know what HOA means. Would be good to know.
My wife's cousin and her husband are over here from Italy, having a short break (as 2023 World Cycling Championship is held in Glasgow). Both of them are retired pharmacologist academics, very high calibre people and as green as one can get when it comes to environment. We were having a chat today, and the husband's comment was "science is not the truth". Obviously we are not setting out to undermine science here, but at the same time we have to be extremely careful not to fall into the hands of science religion as pointed out in the article in the given link.
user 37518
Well-known member
He sounds like a smart guy! Keep us posted.
scott2000
Well-known member
Home Owners Association
Brian Roth
Well-known member
A totally evil invention in the USA. Never been a part of one, but what happens is that a small group of self important a$$holes decide to become despots.
Many are also criminals:
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...a-board-members-stole-millions-from-residents
Bri
the moral "othering" people due to their differences from the group and casting them out came about as a behavior during our time in highly resource-limited settlements where we had to be super risk-averse and now that we have more resources i hope we can change as a species and not be this way anymore. ideological totalitarianism is an outdated and ineffective survival strategy, but all that being said, i really wish people would construct arguments without the apparent secondary goal of competing to see who can bring up the holocaust the most. is someone keeping score somewhere? do guest writers get paid $5 per holocaust reference? it just comes off as a random appeal to emotion.
Last edited:
scott2000
Well-known member
“And because I didn’t believe it, I didn’t know.”
user 37518
Well-known member
Well, I've said it before, Scientism is a religion without accountability. When prophets make prophecies and these prophecies failed to be fulfilled, the prophet is deemed a fake prophet, or the religion/cult a fake religion. But these modern-day science prophets of doom keep prophesizing prophecies that simply do not occur, yet, they are never deemed fake because they can simply say something like "we didn't have enough data back then" or "we didn't know something back then that we do now know, so listen to me now".
That, and also fake promises like "If you get the jab you won't get sick", later to be modified to "well, if you took the jab and boosters you might get sick but you won't die", later to be modified to something like "humanity will probably have to get boosters every six months for eternity". All these are paraphrases, but they pretty much sum up what happened.
Scientism behaves as a religion, but without accountability, when they fail at something, either a prediction or a "fact", they can just claim "well, this is how science works", yes but they don't act like that when they are preaching something like if it was Gospel truth.
What an absolutely hilarious sentence.
scott2000
Well-known member
Yeah...Good thing it's only possible in HOAs...
AnalogPackrat
Well-known member
Did you read the article?
user 37518
Well-known member
It is very easy to mock if you have nothing to say....
boji
Well-known member
I'll try to steelman Volker. I imagine he is thinking classically, that the scientific process is built on accountability; data collection is rigorous and scientists expect to be held to a high standard. Failure is a necessary component to finding out which paths are worth exploring. As well I imagine Volker feels that (real) scientists don't preach, they quantify.
Volker you ought to read the article. It is fair to say that many scientists believe rather than know about things outside their expertise.
My personal opinion is that the publishing methods of mainstream science has been co-opted by political and military powers, and in some cases has been turned into forms of scientism by the masses.
Volker you ought to read the article. It is fair to say that many scientists believe rather than know about things outside their expertise.
My personal opinion is that the publishing methods of mainstream science has been co-opted by political and military powers, and in some cases has been turned into forms of scientism by the masses.
Last edited:
