richard
Member
Be careful !
Upticks in Infections in Mass and RI
- Thread starter Remix
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
- Status
That's not actually true.
Post-modernism asserts that truth is socially constructed. But this doesn't mean that all forms of social construction (and the truth they produce) are equal. Some mechanisms, processes and institutions produce more reliable truths than others. Science has been recognized as being socially constructed since Popper, Kuhn and Lakatos. But it is also the most reliable way to understand the physical world.
One would think but they would be wrong in doing so. He most definitely believes the Earth is 6500 years old
More to the point, this is consistent with results in cognitive psychology that demonstrate that science denial is not at all correlated with levels of education. Rather:
a) Science denial is strongly correlated with a person's self-identification into conservative political or religious communities and
b) The fervency of science denial is correlated with a person's education level.
That is, a Phd in Chemistry who is also a religious fundamentalist is more likely to believe the assertions of their faith (the Earth is 6500 years old) and will hold those beliefs so strongly to insist on explaining it to you for 4 hours straight while you're stuck in the car with him despite numerous requests for him to stop.
EDITED TO ADD: I don't mean to drag this thread into the realm of religion (particularly as I'm also religious). But those interested in the science denial around mask wearing and COVID-19 might benefit from studying the long and painful history of religious science denial. The core mechanisms are the same.
Last edited:
Yikes. Some truths are more truthful than others. Who decides this "truth"? And postmodernism does not follow science when it does not fit their narrative (gender identify, for instance).
From Scientific American:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-unfortunate-fallout-of-campus-postmodernism/
Last edited:
David Metsky
Well-known member
When two guidebooks disagree on the mileage for a trail, and the trail signs have a third value, who do you believe?
In reference to truth being socially constructed. Can anyone tell how to identify whether I have a real poncho or just a Sears poncho?
ChrisB
Well-known member
The fact that you have a poncho at all is telling!
In his book “Guns: Germs and Steel” Diamond claims our first thought when meetIng in the forest as hunter-gatherers was, “ Do I kill this individual or not.”
Old instincts die hard.
Mac
Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2003
- Messages
- 308
- Reaction score
- 18
I believe the value that results in the shortest remaining time to complete my hike
Tom_Murphy
Member
[thread drift] I heard other people talking while on a relatively remote bushwhack. My immediate and overwhelming thought was to be quiet and hide. I knew it was silly, but still, I didn't make may presence known to the "others". [/thread drift]
Yes. Within science, Popper, Kuhn and Lakatos all wrestled with how poor scientific programs/paradigms/central theories are replaced with better ones.
With respect to science vs, say, corporate funded media campaigns or religious ideologies, science does a better job describing and predicting the natural world.
Within science, it is generally done in the consensus building institutions such as the various national and international scientific academies. They are generally well positioned to synthesize results across a given field.
Among the general public, the sad horrifying reality is that everybody individually will decide whether or not to accept the consensus of institutionalized science. Ironically, science itself (cognitive psychology, particularly) tells us that a significant % of the human population is biased to put more faith in their conservative religious or political ideologies than in science - hence the mask wars and lack of public embrace of global warming. I've concluded that the human brain isn't collectively fit enough to survive the extinction epoch that it has manufactured. I've wept enough and shed my last tear in this direction and my compassion is all used up.
Shermer, the author, is a former Christian fundamentalist and his views on scientific epistemology are what I call "scientific fundamentalist". His views on post-modern philosophy a) mirror those by other scientific fundamentalist and b) are horribly wrong.
The connective tissue between his Christian fundamentalism and his scientific fundamentalism is that he's thoroughly stuck in the very modern quest of finding dead certainty. He's traded an absolutist religious view for an absolutist scientific view. I have a friend who writes in the science & religion field who could have written the same exact essay and he's just as wrong and just as fundamentalist as Shermer.
IMO, the much more robust view of scientific epistemology a) accepts that all scientific truth is socially constructed through rigorous social processes and b) asserts that this process produces better, more reliable truth claims about the natural world.
IMO, the strength of a post-modern conceptualization of science is that is allows us to recognize and adjust for the social factors that influence science. Phrenology was bad science. Having so much of the US scientific field dancing to the piper of the defense industrial base, big pharma and big agriculture are similarly bad. Shermer (and my friend) want to put science beyond any social critique - which I and other social constructionists won't accept.
But this doesn't mean that science should be dismissed and replaced with Kellyane Conway's "alternative facts". Current scientific consensus is the current best description of the world. If you don't like what the science says, do better science.
Last edited:
.....and then there was a baby's arm holding an apple!
egilbe
Member
Whatever you believe, is your truth. Your truth could be different from somebody else because of differing experiences leading up to that moment of time. It doesn't mean that your truth can't change. It means, your truth for you and you alone. It also means that another person's truth may differ from yours, and still be correct.
Covid isn't going anywhere. It will always be here. The Human species may change because of it. It may be natures way of correcting a mistake, namely humans. Who knows? Do whats right for you and to hell with what anyone else thinks.
Covid isn't going anywhere. It will always be here. The Human species may change because of it. It may be natures way of correcting a mistake, namely humans. Who knows? Do whats right for you and to hell with what anyone else thinks.
egilbe
Member
I may be full of ****, too
Well, you sent me to google for that one skiguy. Now, how am I going to un-see what I read?
Well, you sent me to google for that one skiguy. Now, how am I going to un-see what I read?
Hey...what can I say. What do you want from life?
- Status
