2 of 2
2
The Science of Why We Don’t Believe Science
Posted: 20 April 2011 12:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4270
Joined  2010-08-15
GdB - 19 April 2011 10:59 PM
citizenschallenge.pm - 19 April 2011 04:43 PM
brightfut - 19 April 2011 02:25 PM

What do you mean by “believe?” The scientific process is real?  The scientific process is valuable/good/likeable?  The scientific process is trustworthy?  The scientific process is the best process yet discovered for epistemology?

all of the above   cheese

Take care.

As in beware?
Nice post and good thread there, thanks for the reminder, it was worth reading through it again {well at least the beginning}.  My above remarks were more superficial for sure.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

psikeyhackr - 19 April 2011 01:27 PM

When a baby is learning to walk isn’t it using the scientific process?
If I do this, I fall down.  If I do that, I fall down.  If I do this other thing, HEY, I DON’T FALL DOWN.  I think I’l try it that way again.
That is what I mean about understanding.  When you understand it for yourself then it could be the scientific process. 

It ain’t for sure ‘til you test it for yourself.  When you take someone’s word but don’t understand it then it ain’t science even if it is correct.  psik

I was following along for sure, but then it sort of crumbled.  Don’t we at some point need to trust others?  I love astronomy, physics, geology, evolution but wouldn’t know a thing without taking the word of others, who are respected as authorities by other more intelligent and experienced than I could hope to be.  Off course their teaching need to make it through my experience formed filters of voracity (so to speak)... but still a demand to experience and see everything for oneself seems a bit metaphysical…  hopelessly unattainable.

[ Edited: 20 April 2011 12:29 AM by citizenschallenge.pm ]
 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 April 2011 05:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  582
Joined  2010-04-19
Bees Mom - 19 April 2011 02:59 PM
brightfut - 19 April 2011 02:55 PM
Bees Mom - 19 April 2011 12:37 AM

Makes me want to be vigilant about my own flexibility in regarding new information.

Noble sentiments.

Hopefully I’ll have some follow through. I guess the thing about being inflexible is that you can’t see it until you’re flexible.

C

Which is why I so vigorously argue for patience when dealing with stubborn people who have wierd and unjustified beliefs. The key is understanding that we are just as much human as they are.

 Signature 

Don’t get set into one form, adapt it and build your own, and let it grow, be like water. Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like water. Now you put water in a cup, it becomes the cup; You put water into a bottle it becomes the bottle; You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.

- Bruce Lee -

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 April 2011 10:15 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2415
Joined  2007-07-05
citizenschallenge.pm - 20 April 2011 12:23 AM

I was following along for sure, but then it sort of crumbled.  Don’t we at some point need to trust others?  I love astronomy, physics, geology, evolution but wouldn’t know a thing without taking the word of others, who are respected as authorities by other more intelligent and experienced than I could hope to be.  Off course their teaching need to make it through my experience formed filters of voracity (so to speak)... but still a demand to experience and see everything for oneself seems a bit metaphysical…  hopelessly unattainable.

There was this really disgusting case on 60 Minutes where there was this doctor telling people that they needed heart operations when they really didn’t.  The operation was complicated and somebody did die.  In another case a patient was warned by a nurse.

I am not saying there are not cases where you have no choice but to go along with someone that you think is an expert.  All I am saying is accept that that is all you are doing.

The trouble is this language doesn’t have more than one word for KNOW.  I could say:

I KNOW the Sun is 93,000,000 miles away.

But the fact of the matter is I have never measured it myself.  There should be another word which implies that it is not knowledge from personal experience but accepted from authority judged to be sufficiently reliable.

I only give that a 98% probability of being correct by the way.  LOL  I hardly ever rate anything at 100%.  I only give my right hand a 99.7% probability of having 4 fingers and a thumb.  LOL

It sounds to me like you WANT TO BELIEVE in Science.

To me reality just is and science is a though process of learning about reality and the knowledge that results from that process is not really the science it is just information that conforms to reality as best we know at this time.  You never know when something weird may happen.

Everybody was really confident about Newton for a while.  Then in 1858 they discovered the precession of the orbit of Mercury.  How could Newton be wrong?  But why was there a discrepancy?  It wasn’t until Einstein came along that it was explained.  So there is always the POSSIBILITY that there is something wrong with what you think you know but that you haven’t found yet.  Until then you go with what you think you know because you must go on regardless.

Some people that “love science” don’t like uncertainty but uncertainty is part of it.

psik

[ Edited: 20 April 2011 10:23 AM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 April 2011 03:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4270
Joined  2010-08-15
psikeyhackr - 20 April 2011 10:15 AM

It sounds to me like you WANT TO BELIEVE in Science.

Don’t think that’s a fair assessment.

psikeyhackr - 20 April 2011 10:15 AM

Everybody was really confident about Newton for a while.  Then in 1858 they discovered the precession of the orbit of Mercury.  How could Newton be wrong?  But why was there a discrepancy?  It wasn’t until Einstein came along that it was explained.  So there is always the POSSIBILITY that there is something wrong with what you think you know but that you haven’t found yet.  Until then you go with what you think you know because you must go on regardless.

I never could understand how people say Newton was “wrong” how can that be if Newtonian mechanics is still used in everyday engineering.
It was more than provisionally correct,
If less than complete,
but how does that make it wrong?

What’s curious is writing that paragraph and then finishing with the following line.

psikeyhackr - 20 April 2011 10:15 AM

Some people that “love science” don’t like uncertainty but uncertainty is part of it.

 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 May 2011 11:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  143
Joined  2008-09-27

i’d agree that the people who “newton’s theories are all wrong” are, well, wrong; but the specific mention above seems to be referring to newton’s laws being wrong in a particular case.

and i certainly don’t see anything wrong with or ironic about accentuating the importance of understanding fallibility…

speaking of fallibility, though; direct experience itself is extremely fallible.  You’ve all heard about eye-witness testimony being notoriously unreliable, right?  I think we still give way too much credence to it.

and then there’s the McGurk effect…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 May 2011 12:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4270
Joined  2010-08-15
isaac - 14 May 2011 11:56 PM

McGurk effect…

Hate to admit I had to look it up.
So our brains helps compose our sensory inputs.


Sort of related to the learned eye, such as being a carpenter when I walk up to a house I see it differently than someone who’s never picked up a nail or two-by.

 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 May 2011 01:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  143
Joined  2008-09-27

yeah… no shame in having to look it up… in fact, i was kinda hoping to provoke someone into posting a youtube link…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 May 2011 02:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11
isaac - 15 May 2011 01:30 AM

yeah… no shame in having to look it up… in fact, i was kinda hoping to provoke someone into posting a youtube link…

I had to refresh my memory too. The word was familiar, but I needed a memory refresher…

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 May 2011 01:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  143
Joined  2008-09-27

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFfAqqLppIM

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2