Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Whether to leave this forum or not
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


(8)
Message 11 of 307 (655324)
03-09-2012 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Buzsaw
03-09-2012 8:08 AM


Re: Despised POVs
Well said, Buz. I think a phrase you might recognize is "iron sharpening iron"?
This notion of one's ideas and positions emerging from the scrap battle-tested, tempered, and sharpened is the very reason for debate. It's not to win or lose; it's to fight and in doing so, have one's ideas either withstand the onslaught or be cast aside.
It's a critical component of the scientific method. Most people are aware that the scientific method is some combination of "Observation, Hypothesis forming, Experimentation, Conclusion, Communication." Perhaps few are aware that the last step - communicating your results - is the most important step, because that's when your ideas are subject to the withering criticism and scorn of the scientific community.
I think a lot of people don't know that about science - that peer-review is an adversarial process. I think creationists in particular misinterpret scientific skepticism of their submissions as innish rejection of opposing viewpoints, but evolutionists get treated this way, too. I wish I could show you some of the comments on some of my wife's papers! It's the default mode of the peer-review system - you submit the result of perhaps a decade of your life's work, 4-6 people you've never met tell you how terrible it is, what a bad researcher you must be, ask questions you don't have any answers to, make imprecations against your mother's sexual habits, give you 200 impossible and inconsistent demands for your next resubmission, and so on. That's if you're lucky. If you're unlucky they take one look at your work and tell you "thanks, but no thanks." If you're extremely lucky they give you 90 days to fix all the problems with your work and resubmit, and then you get to go through it all again.
Foreveryoung is upset that his ideas were presented to an audience that turned out to be hostile when it wasn't completely disinterested. I think most people are surprised to find out that that's par for the course for scientists. Easy acceptance of ideas is what you want to be suspicious of.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Buzsaw, posted 03-09-2012 8:08 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Taq, posted 03-09-2012 12:47 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 28 by foreveryoung, posted 03-10-2012 2:03 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 265 of 307 (659385)
04-15-2012 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 264 by Chuck77
04-15-2012 5:41 PM


I'd also like to see FY participate in a Great Debate. Actually, I'd like to see you participate in one as well, Chuck.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Chuck77, posted 04-15-2012 5:41 PM Chuck77 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by Chuck77, posted 04-15-2012 6:39 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 271 of 307 (659395)
04-15-2012 7:21 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by Chuck77
04-15-2012 6:39 PM


I was in one with Straggler.
My apologies, Chuck, I must have missed it. I'll take a look at it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by Chuck77, posted 04-15-2012 6:39 PM Chuck77 has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024