264
submitted 1 year ago by Sibbo@sopuli.xyz to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] s20@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That is an impossible standard for folks to live by. I can't do that, and neither can you.

When I say I "trust in science" I'm talking about the process and the method. Which means I trust the results when people follow that process. i also trust that the answers may change if there's new information, because that's part of the process.

I don't have the equipment to perform all those experiments. Even if I did, I wouldn't trust the results because I don't have the education to set up, run, and interpret an experiment more complicated than improving my chili recipe.

So, in much the same way that I trust a mechanic to fix my transmission and a.plumber to fix my pipes, I trust a scientist to follow the scientific method.

That's what "trusting science" means.

[-] utopianfiat@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I trust a scientist to follow the scientific method.

The scientific method isn't an epistemological framework, it's a framework for practicing science.

[-] s20@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

And what part of what I said made you think I don't know that?

I'm aspedantic as anyone, but at this point you're being antagonistic. Either you legitimately don't know you're doing it, or you're intentionally trying to make people feel stupid. But you definitely know what people mean when they say they "trust" science.

Please stop. You're making pedants like me look bad.

[-] utopianfiat@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Why assume I'm being pedantic? The social media landscape is littered with "I fucking love science" clickbait, "amazing nature" accounts that are literally AI generated photos, hell, the entire fields of evolutionary psychology and nutrition ought to be a wholesale indictment of our contemporary scientific establishment.

This isn't pedantry, I am serious as a heart attack.

[-] s20@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I mostly assumed you were being pedantic when you tried to make out that I thought science was epistemological rather than methodological when I had mentioned science as a methodology in my previous post. This lead me to three possibilities (well, likely possibilityies, anyway):

  1. You didn't really read what I wrote
  2. You're dumb
  3. You're being pedantic to belittle people.

Now, you're pretty clearly not dumb, so I just eliminated 2. That left me with 1 and 3 as the most likely. I played the odds that someone who was clever couldn't possibly have missed the point of the initial comment so many times, so I went with 3.

What I didn't count on was possibility 4: you've had to deal with so many morons who don't know what "science" means that your default assumption is that people mean something dumb when they say "I trust science."

Which is my bad, really. I should have asked. I apologize.

this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2023
264 points (89.5% liked)

Asklemmy

44052 readers
875 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS