Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-19-2019 1:22 PM
32 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 857,046 Year: 12,082/19,786 Month: 1,863/2,641 Week: 372/708 Day: 66/81 Hour: 9/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What are acceptable sources of "scientific knowledge"?
Taq
Member
Posts: 7971
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 9 of 38 (724925)
04-22-2014 4:22 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by RAZD
04-22-2014 3:59 PM


Re: Conspiracy Theory and Validation
So if a body like NASA admits to spraying chemtrails from airplanes then I guess that part of it is not a conspiracy ... I say "that part" because the other part of the conspiracy theory is that the chemicals are for mind control (get out the tinfoil hats).

All good crackpottery and consiracy has a kernel of truth. That is what makes it so compelling to the nutters. You could just as easily point to the fact that burning jet fuel does put chemicals in the air, or even point to crop dusters that put chemicals in the air.

It is the massive leap from "putting chemicals in the air" to "a government wide conspiracy to control your mind" that differentiates the sane from the nutters.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 04-22-2014 3:59 PM RAZD has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Ben!, posted 04-23-2014 10:26 AM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7971
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 10 of 38 (724927)
04-22-2014 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Ben!
04-21-2014 12:11 PM


When we request each other to provide evidence in an argument, should we be referring to source papers that contain original data, or is referring to authorities good enough?

If you are citing specific research, then you should always try to cite the original peer reviewed paper that the research is found in. If you don't understand the material, a good alternative is a quote from one of the scientists in a secondary article, like those found in Scientific American. In those articles, the scientists will "dumb down" the findings for a more general audience.

For general knowledge, a well respected college level textbook is a good place to start, and can usually be found in your local library. If you are talking about biochemistry and you quote Stryer, then I know it is probably solid info. Stryer's textbook is still considered to be one of the standards.

If you lack that reference, then your best bet is to qualify your statements, and ask if an expert in the discussion can verify what you are saying.

if I'm not a nerdy book-worm whose primary interest is learning about the natural world, how do I participate in your democracy?

By supporting nerdy book-worms who do study the natural world. Investment in science is an investment in society.

Or more generally, how do you expect a general public who is not necessarily compelled by knowledge to interact with you?

Science and scientists should always be held accountable by the general public. This is done through oversight and making sure that safeguards are in place. For example, Congress makes sure that administrators watch over how public research money is spent, and that research adheres to the ethics set forth by Congress in law (i.e. HIPAA rules for human subjects). As far as the science itself, it is inherent competition in science that keeps things honest. I think we expect the public to leave that to the scientists.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Ben!, posted 04-21-2014 12:11 PM Ben! has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7971
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 16 of 38 (724988)
04-23-2014 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Ben!
04-23-2014 10:26 AM


Re: Conspiracy Theory and Validation
Can you expand on this? It's not clear to me why this isn't a reasonable concern to have.

Perhaps you could explain why it is a reasonable concern. The fact that no one can present a reasonable argument is what makes it unreasonable.

And what is a "nutter"?

Someone whose beliefs are not tethered to reality.

Given their experience, that seems reasonable to me--not to you?

What makes it reasonable?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Ben!, posted 04-23-2014 10:26 AM Ben! has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Ben!, posted 04-23-2014 11:41 AM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7971
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 22 of 38 (725054)
04-23-2014 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Ben!
04-23-2014 11:41 AM


Re: Conspiracy Theory and Validation
Would you accept that there's a long history of governments trying to control their populace? Either through force, through selective access to information, or other means?

Does that mean you can make up anything with relation to governments controlling their citizens and have it be reasonable? No. That is the whole point.

The government planting mind control chemicals in jet fuel so that it can be used to control the minds of the US population is ludicrous.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Ben!, posted 04-23-2014 11:41 AM Ben! has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Ben!, posted 04-24-2014 9:53 AM Taq has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7971
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 38 of 38 (725317)
04-25-2014 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Ben!
04-25-2014 4:00 PM


Re: Illogical use of logic?
Yes, exactly! I feel like we (people focused on science and empiricism) have really failed to do this, in politics, conversations, and everything else--to the detriment of getting real traction on many of our ideas.

There will always be times in history when people prefer to believe in comfortable lies instead of uncomfortable truths. We can supply the facts and hope people pull their head's out of their asses.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Ben!, posted 04-25-2014 4:00 PM Ben! has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019