|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
|
| |
| ChatGPT | |
| Total: 916,832 Year: 4,089/9,624 Month: 960/974 Week: 287/286 Day: 8/40 Hour: 0/4 |
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: Becoming Less Wrong | |||||||||||||||||
|
onifre Member (Idle past 2978 days)  Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
I think the main objective is to get people who would otherwise not trust science, because of that 'We are right' label, to start understanding science with the newly improved 'We are less wrong than before' label.
To me, this seemed like the whole point to the letter. However, life is subjective. No matter how much evidence certain theories may carry, they will not be able to trump someones subjective experience. People like to be right and as was stated in the letter,
because the underlying ideas themselves are alien and disturbing to many people, who have the feeling they know how to be "right" but have no idea at all how to be "less wrong," and for whom the whole thing sounds defeatist, to be settling for second best. ...we see that even when faced with 'facts' about any particular area of science, people will reject it on the bases of their own subjective experience being easier for them to confirm as 'truth'. Truth however, is tenative, but only for those who continue to persue the question that was asked. For those with religious beliefs, they seek no further 'truths' because they feel they already have it. So science may try to get closer to being 'less wrong', but people with religious belief feel they already are 'right'. Our goal should be to better present science, not as a dogmatic belief, but as a pursuit to being 'less wrong', that way both sides can feel that neither is trying to trump the other. Rememer we have to be gentle when we slide in the facts about science into the creationists' back side Edited by onifre, : spelling "All great truths begin as blasphemies" "I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks "I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
onifre Member (Idle past 2978 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
A little too generalized, dontcha think? You are correct sir...that was a bit of generalizing on my part. I too have spiritual beliefs. I meant more of a religious belief that forces people to reject tested evidence.
I think you probably meant some specific relious beliefs rather than in a general since, but still....
I did... "All great truths begin as blasphemies" "I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks "I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
onifre Member (Idle past 2978 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
There is "right." Science is an endeavor to find that, or to get as close to it as we can. Certainly at the same time we are doing that, we are also getting "less wrong." But at bottom, the goal is not to become "less wrong," but to find out what is "right." I agree that there is 'right', and I feel that the way science approaches the questions is the proper way, or rather the 'right' way.
In fact, I think that the idea that science is not about finding out what is "right" is actually counterproductive. The world is full of anti-science types, and those suspicious of science. They would find solace in the concept that science isn't looking for what's right because there is no right. If instead it's all about getting "less wrong," it's a lot easier for them to say they're getting "less wrong" as much as science is, but in a different way. Yes, and as someone who places faith in the scientific method I understand your point. However, those 'anti-science types', are anti because to them their subjective experiences are what matters most. So a dogmatic approach scares them off...like the paper said, no one wants to be in second place.
The goal of science is to accurately describe the world. I will have to disagree to some extent with this. I believe the role of science is to collect evidence and give a qualified interpretation of that evidence. If that evidence brings us closer to understanding the natural world then good, however, it could have a counter effect and make the natural world seem much more confussing also...as with something like String Theory perhaps. I think the GOAL of science is to collect evidence using the scientific method, the HOPE would then be that that evidence accuratly describes the natural world.
But to argue for that point by suggesting that there is no "truth" is not the way to go about it. Agreed. But thats where it falls back to subjective experiences being much easier for people to place faith into than what science may be claiming about the natural world. There is 'truth', this we can all agree on. But, 'truth' is something that is agreed upon by a majority. There is a majority of Muslims that believe the 'truth' is what is written in the Koran(many Christians as well with the Bible). How then would you express to them the problems with their 'truth', and then in turn have them agree that the new 'truth', which you are presenting(or rather science), is much more plausable than theirs? Here is where the point in the letter is made about changing sciences views from 'We are right', to 'We are workinig on being less wrong'. This will of course be fuel for those who will still oppose science, but then again, what ISN"T fuel for those opposed to science? Edited by onifre, : spelling "All great truths begin as blasphemies" "I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks "I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
