• Pika@rekabu.ru
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    24 hours ago

    This is mostly shared as an arrogant statement towards laymen, but really, it’s a reminder for scientists themselves

    No matter what you think or believe your experiment should yield, reality check is always waiting around the corner.

    Nice, when seen in this light!

  • RockBottom@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Science is a field of work, and its participants are able to think. But they don’t care what you and me think?

  • Gsus4@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    yeah, about that…yer funding…it comes in part from some of those anti-science folk… :/

  • Randelung@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Everything goes through our brains and therefore filters and interpretations. Science doesn’t happen if grants are approved and that usually means someone has something to gain. Even then, results are skewed by method and biases.

    Science very much does care about our feelings, both individual and collective, every step of the way. That’s why there needs to be special care to take them out as much as possible.

  • Juice@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Science isn’t an ontology, it’s a method.

    God, what no humanities does to a mf

    • zloubida@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      And a method in which beliefs are important. Not the religious ones, of course, but there are other kinds of beliefs.

    • PunnyName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      2 days ago

      Exactly. I keep trying to get people to understand that it’s a process, just like running is a process.

      • 5715@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I have the suspicion, once you’re far enough in any field, you’ll view as a process what colloquially is considered a binary state. You’ll continue talking like it isn’t a process, because you don’t have the time to explain it all the time.

    • Preußisch Blau@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      Believing that science yields universally true results or is the only method of finding truths, however, is an ontology and something you have to believe.

      Edit: I’m not anti-science or anything, just a pedant.

      • flora_explora@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        I agree with the second part of that sentence, but who would think that they discover universal truths or any truths at all? The whole premise of science is that we cannot verify anything or find any real truth. We can just show that anything else is much more unlikely to be true.

      • yesman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Believing that science yields universally true results or is the only method of finding truths

        You just described science as though it were a belief system. In reality, science has a presumption that your ideals are false, not true. And a person who could only discover truth through science wouldn’t be able to dress or feed themselves.

  • Chakravanti@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    24 hours ago

    The only fuck Science gives is on/in the other end, Like at the Cortex Relay’s battle for the Truth 's broadcast.

    Some people just don’t understand what some words mean. Some people think they no everything. Some people think that they are limited to any arbitrary awareness dimensions that they know of. Some people think there are only a certain number of dimensions.

    Some people Fly Fire like it’s obviously the only way physics work and they they know what matter is.

    Some people ask questions. Some people SkewEl and tell people they know.

    Sum people just do the math ;but what dimensions is/are Math relevant to?

    • psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      That’s medicine. Science just sees it as a problem to be sorted by good study design and statistics

    • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      problem?

      seems like you’re drawing on a guilt by association fallacy

      Is there anyone out there who hates Ben Shapiro and the temperamental cranks who act like their subjective appeals to emotion & outrage have anywhere as much merit as valid, objective arguments that take actual effort? The latter is tiresome, and they absolutely deserve Ben’s catchphrase: everyone should be appropriating it to nobler causes than Ben’s to annoy him & criticize those irrational twerps.

  • OpenStars@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Until you turn your head and stop observing, and then it reverts back to mysticism. :-P

    img

    • psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      You’re referring to quantum effects? Don’t worry about whether you’re not watching, the universe is watching. If one photon is emitted from the thing in a quantum state and hits anything, that’s the observation

    • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      What do you mean? Sociology I kind of get, but psychology nowadays is a purely quantitative discipline (despite its subject being squishier than other quantitative sciences).