|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Bad science? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Couple of problems with that example: 1) That was good science. It was the best information we had at the time which has since been corrected by new information. 2) Some of the problem with "eggs and bacon are very bad for you" as an idea was how the information was reported and disseminated to the public. It is very important to separate scientific findings from how those findings are reported.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
There are specific requirements to make what is science, and what isn't science. quote: Oh? Where is this list of specific requirements of who is and who is not considered a Christian that is agreed upon by all Christians? But anyway, you are not comparing like things. Science and Scientists are different things. Science is the body of knowledge, and it is also the specific methodology used by scientists to discover that knowledge. There are very specific criterion, generally agreed upon by all scientists, which are written down and anyone can understand and use them to determine if something is scientific or not. If some person is a scientist or not is a completely different question, and a bit muddier than the one above. What makes a person a scientist, I think, is that they use the scientific method properly in their work, and if their main occupation is developing and testing theory.
quote: Right. But remember that you responded to a comment about what can be called science, not scientists.
quote: No, I think that calling oneself a scientist requires more. It is a highly skilled profession requiring a decade or more of training and higher education, after all. Do you think that one can become a police officer, or a surgeon, or an engineer just by deciding you are one? Following a religion has nothing at all to do with learning any skill or technique or knowledge. It is a philosophical/emotional thing only.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: If I play basketball under the official rules, does that mean that I can be considered a basketball player in the same way that Michael Jordan is considered a basketball player, only that he is better than me?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Maybe a skilled experimenter, or technician?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Well, it depends. I am positive that there are people not working in the areas you mention whom I'd call scientists, but neither do I think that "people who use the scientific method in their work" is all that these people do to qualify as scientists.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
So, when Michael Jordan says "I'm a basketball player" and I say "I'm a basketball player", it means exactly the same thing to each of us, and everyone else?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: No, no, of course not. "Developing theory" means to me that you propose and test your ideas about some natural phenomena. That's all.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Yes and no. In the common use of the word, no. If someone says "I am a scientist", I think most people would assume that they are a professional, and that's the way I'm using the word, pretty much. I also define it further in the ways I've described, as in testing theory, etc.
quote: See, I don't mind elitism being attached to professioal scientists at all. There's a reason most undergrads in science never get to the PhD level; it's damned difficult and it is a real accomplishment that most people don't understand nor respect at all. It is an elite group and should be regarded as such. That doesn't mean that doing science, using the scientific method, should be considered an elite activity. Far from it. But the idea that anybody who "does science" is a scientist is just not true in my mind, using my definition of "scientist."
quote: I don't think that, in general, professionals are mistrusted because they understand things that the general populace doesn't. Every professional has specialized knowledge that people who are not in that profession don't understand.
quote: What science needs is another Carl Sagan.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024