This is how #Science will be remembered

9 posts

Kulturkampf
Revelations of the Past Few Minutes
Thoughts

The issue actually isn't about scientism (which is an actually coherent, if nihilistic worldview) but 'word'-ism. People who think in terms of abstract labels, and trust/distrust of abstract labels, are simply "word thinkers" apparently impervious to any discourse based on actual content.

The use of "science" as a general marketing label (or just an abstract label) is simply a tactical trap to get people to say that instead of "trusting" science, we should "not trust" science (as generally defined). This is often done in some of the more vaporous forms of Christian apologetics, e.g.:

(Notice the over-use of the word "trust", as opposed to simply *seeing*, not trusting, that there are different components to something, and the level of evidence different for each one.)

Similar comments abound, e.g. that nobody should trust "physics" because "feminist physics" happens to exist, or some people apparently call astrology physics, so therefore physics is "not to be trusted". (Or chemistry is not to be trusted, since people can *call* alchemy chemistry, and so chemistry as a label is not to be trusted.).

Any assertion about the trust or distrust of marketing labels is stupid, since abstract labels themselves are far too loose to be relevant. The same applies for all overly loose classes of items: say, if a certain factory in Detroit produces faulty products, no one suddenly concludes that "all technology from North America is not to be trusted". The ordinary understanding of the word "distrust" implies distrust *of* a specific degree and type, partly measured by the consequences of it [notice here, the fact that an entire class is distrusted doesn't mean the *fact* that something belongs to that class makes it distrusted, because nothing 'merely' belongs to a label rather than a label also based on specific criteria], and determined by whether the *object* of distrust is even relevant.

[ Note: the above can be easily re-stated in terms of conditioning; i.e., that 'word'-thinkers do not understand the *basic definition* of conditional probabilities. But it would still not address the main issue which is still the verbal trickery in how the objects are not well-formed in the first place. Rhetorically, one speaks here not of inference, but two "kinds" of distrust (two levels of consequence), in order to 'simplify' it for mass consumption.]

Again, if someone claims that they are a "scientist" or any other word (e.g., a "biologist"), what matters isn't the label but what specific criteria the word is based on. An actual scientist will never say that something is "absolutely settled" or any variation of this -- he will just describe roughly what is the evidence for it, or at least indicate what it is, and what he believes in. At most, he'll say something is "stupid", but not that it is blasphemous or "dangerous". That is so if "science" is based on a criteria of actual content , instead of marketing labels or superficial appearances.

To repeat: the only relevant definition of "science" (or anything else) is based on *specific criteria of content*, not an *abstract label*. As such, climate "science" is in the same class as feminist physics.
Thoughts

The following usage of "trust" on the other hand is not confusing b/c of the juxtaposition with the context (in which a blind dogmatism is simply negated):

[​IMG]

A simple heuristic: if any field has the word "science" in it, it's not science . E.g., climate "science", cognitive "science", management "science", business "science", economic "science", food "science".

Actual sciences are single words: physics, chemistry, mathematics, statistics, etc. (Economics is the exception here. Life "sciences" don't count because they refer to multiple fields.)

Llwyd Cioran
Chic bot

Very courteous of ZOG elites to grant us untermensch a glimpse of their services for only a measly $8000

RedHand
Harvesting the blood of Blacks and White poor in order to keep the Elite alive.
Vuk
Llwyd Cioran