Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8739 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-30-2017 1:01 AM
379 online now:
Coyote, Dredge, Faith, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), PaulK, Rrhain (6 members, 373 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,773 Year: 10,379/21,208 Month: 3,466/2,674 Week: 9/873 Day: 9/76 Hour: 0/9

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1011121314
15
Author Topic:   How long does it take to evolve?
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15800
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.4


(3)
Message 211 of 221 (770940)
10-16-2015 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 208 by MrHambre
10-16-2015 6:16 AM


Re: The Limits of Skepticism
And my question still stands: is there any conceivable critique of modern science that we would find acceptable?

Well, a minimum requirement would be that someone should tell me what it is.

It seems like we're just really adept at handwaving away any critique of modern science on the grounds that the person delivering it must be ignorant ...

Au contraire. I have asked repeatedly if you or Lamden can tell me what his critique is, and have been told in return that since he's a philosopher and an "intellectual" his critique must be worth taking seriously. What I have not been told is what it is. No-one has handwaved it away, we haven't seen it yet. But we've been asked to admire it sight unseen on the grounds that the person delivering it must not be ignorant.

I'll ask you again: can you tell me what his "critique" is, or can you just tell me that he's an intellectual? Only his credentials interest me less than his ideas.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by MrHambre, posted 10-16-2015 6:16 AM MrHambre has not yet responded

  
MrHambre
Member (Idle past 18 days)
Posts: 1493
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 212 of 221 (770963)
10-16-2015 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by Percy
10-16-2015 7:59 AM


Re: The Limits of Skepticism
Percy writes:

If you're criticizing those who are skeptical of philosophical criticisms of scientific inquiry and modes of thought, then I don't we are, at least not all of us.


Fair enough. There just seems to be a siege mentality where people would rather not acknowledge problems with scientific inquiry. And it's certainly not as if every attempt to describe such problems has done so in good faith, so a certain amount of defensiveness is to be expected. I think Nagel and Lewontin succeeded in at least producing food for thought.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by Percy, posted 10-16-2015 7:59 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by ringo, posted 10-16-2015 1:30 PM MrHambre has not yet responded
 Message 214 by Tangle, posted 10-16-2015 2:26 PM MrHambre has not yet responded
 Message 215 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-16-2015 3:05 PM MrHambre has not yet responded
 Message 218 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-16-2015 9:20 PM MrHambre has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 12925
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 213 of 221 (770966)
10-16-2015 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by MrHambre
10-16-2015 1:24 PM


Re: The Limits of Skepticism
Mrhambre writes:

There just seems to be a siege mentality where people would rather not acknowledge problems with scientific inquiry.


I think it has more to do with wanting to get on with the inquiry instead of obsessing about how the inquiry is done. It's like going in vacation instead of incessantly planning the perfect vacation.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by MrHambre, posted 10-16-2015 1:24 PM MrHambre has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4547
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 214 of 221 (770968)
10-16-2015 2:26 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by MrHambre
10-16-2015 1:24 PM


Re: The Limits of Skepticism
MrH writes:

There just seems to be a siege mentality where people would rather not acknowledge problems with scientific inquiry.

This is just your bloody straw man again.

The entire premise of the scientific method is based on skeptism; including the using the right method for the task. So far no better method has been found for resolving the problems about stuff around us. Just thinking about it really hard for long periods is generally not nearly enough and often useless - theoretical ideas have to be tested to have real explanatory value.

But if you have something real to bring to the table, rather than a general, unsubstantaited moan, let's have it.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by MrHambre, posted 10-16-2015 1:24 PM MrHambre has not yet responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1351
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 215 of 221 (770973)
10-16-2015 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by MrHambre
10-16-2015 1:24 PM


Re: The Limits of Skepticism
I had planned to not comment further, but then you said this:

There just seems to be a siege mentality where people would rather not acknowledge problems with scientific inquiry.

So far, you have not pointed out any valid problems with scientific enquiry raised by philosophers, that I can see. Could you point some out?

And it's certainly not as if every attempt to describe such problems has done so in good faith, so a certain amount of defensiveness is to be expected.

I see skepticism more than defensiveness. If you are talking about here at EvC, well this is a debate forum so you should expect disagreement if someone thinks you are wrong. If someone describes problems in bad faith I would expect that pretty much anything they had to say after that can be disregarded. One lie can sink a career.

I think Nagel and Lewontin succeeded in at least producing food for thought.

I chewed on it for a bit and then spat it out when I realized it tasted like crap.

I noticed when reading what you have written over that last few months that you seem quite enamored with some philosophers and several times I thought to myself that you were putting a different spin on their positions than I did. That is ok, we all see things our own way when it comes to opinions.

Personally I love pretty much everything Richard Feynman had to say, go figure.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by MrHambre, posted 10-16-2015 1:24 PM MrHambre has not yet responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4547
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 216 of 221 (770986)
10-16-2015 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by MrHambre
10-16-2015 6:16 AM


Re: The Limits of Skepticism
MrH writes:

Okay. I still say that no one would have proposed that billions of dollars of taxpayers' money be spent on the Human Genome Project if there weren't a popular misconception of how crucial a detailed knowledge of DNA is to the good of society. The progressive in me wonders how much improvement in personal and social well-being those billions could have generated if we were as adamant about understanding the environmental and socioeconomic aspects of phenomena like disease and deviance.

Why is it a popular misconception that a detailed knowledge of DNA is to the good of society? And why do you think we are not spending billions on fighting disease and deviance? And why are you trapping yourself, yet again, in false choices?


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by MrHambre, posted 10-16-2015 6:16 AM MrHambre has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-16-2015 6:07 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1351
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 6.7


(1)
Message 217 of 221 (770994)
10-16-2015 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 216 by Tangle
10-16-2015 4:51 PM


Re: The Limits of Skepticism
MrH writes:

Okay. I still say that no one would have proposed that billions of dollars of taxpayers' money be spent on the Human Genome Project if there weren't a popular misconception of how crucial a detailed knowledge of DNA is to the good of society. The progressive in me wonders how much improvement in personal and social well-being those billions could have generated if we were as adamant about understanding the environmental and socioeconomic aspects of phenomena like disease and deviance.


Why is it a popular misconception that a detailed knowledge of DNA is to the good of society? And why do you think we are not spending billions on fighting disease and deviance? And why are you trapping yourself, yet again, in false choices?

Bingo!! As I read this, something just clicked into place. Thinking back over the MrHambre posts that I have read there is a strong undercurrent of disapproval or dislike of science. He likes philosophers who criticise science whether they know what they are talking about or not. I may be wrong, but that's how it seems to me.

The Human Genome Project yielded so much more than just detailed knowledge about DNA. There were incredible improvements in the technology and a huge new branch of science, molecular biology has grown up and is starting to have positive impacts in medicine, agriculture, and many branches of science.

I guess I am a bit of a cheerleader, but one of my very close friends and co-researcher on several projects has become a major player in molecular biology and she just received an $800K grant for her research.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by Tangle, posted 10-16-2015 4:51 PM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Pressie, posted 11-02-2015 7:44 AM Tanypteryx has acknowledged this reply

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15800
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 218 of 221 (771009)
10-16-2015 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by MrHambre
10-16-2015 1:24 PM


Re: The Limits of Skepticism
There just seems to be a siege mentality where people would rather not acknowledge problems with scientific inquiry.

Actually there's a "mentality" where people ask you what these problems are and you won't tell us.

I think Nagel and Lewontin succeeded in at least producing food for thought.

If you think that Nagel has succeeded in "producing food for thought", do you know what it is he actually said? Or are you just supposing that he must have made some good point, though you don't know what it is, because he's an "intellectual"?

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by MrHambre, posted 10-16-2015 1:24 PM MrHambre has not yet responded

  
Big_Al35
Member
Posts: 384
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 219 of 221 (771864)
10-31-2015 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by Theodoric
09-30-2015 8:35 AM


Re: Thanks to all of you for reading my question
Theodoric writes:

You do realize that Happy Days was a fictional TV show don't you?

Tragic news I just learned today -
American actor Al Molinaro, who starred as "Big Al" Delvecchio in sitcom Happy Days, has died at the age of 96.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Theodoric, posted 09-30-2015 8:35 AM Theodoric has not yet responded

    
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1577
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.1


(1)
Message 220 of 221 (771983)
11-02-2015 7:44 AM
Reply to: Message 217 by Tanypteryx
10-16-2015 6:07 PM


Re: The Limits of Skepticism
Tanypteryx writes:

Thinking back over the MrHambre posts that I have read there is a strong undercurrent of disapproval or dislike of science.

I also got the same undercurrent of disapproval about science from that person. Actually, in the posts from that person I picked up a very great distaste for anything scientific.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-16-2015 6:07 PM Tanypteryx has acknowledged this reply

    
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2730
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 221 of 221 (772049)
11-04-2015 2:20 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by Lamden
10-13-2015 12:21 PM


Re: Ok, let's dig a little deeper
DWise1 writes:

But back to Nagel (German for "nail").


Speaking of which, you are no doubt well aware that Wise is German for "white". And I am called Schwartz. And according to Michael Jackson, "It doesn't matter if you're black or white", so I guess we can still be freinds.

No, not quite.

Wise is not German for "white". It is not even German.

Weiß is "white". Yes, it has very commonly been changed to "Wise", but that is not my case. When my ancestor from Baden arrived to board that ship in Le Havre, he gave his name as "Wies". In German, that could have referred to a name associated with "meadow", "Wiese". Or to the town of Wies. I do not know which it is and am still trying to research it.

The thing about "Nagel" meaning "nail" was a pun meaning that this guy Nagel seems to think that he had "nailed"something.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Lamden, posted 10-13-2015 12:21 PM Lamden has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
1011121314
15
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017