Asbestos, climate change, 5G, coronavirus - the public is caught in a battle for the truth. Science is being manipulated and undermined to sway opinion and...
I get that there is an almost religious dogmatism in some parts of science, and if that is the aspect you are referring to, then I don’t disagree, but your statements without context come across as a religious person who begrudgingly accepts that science can be right about certain things but view the whole thing with perhaps an unreasonable skepticism. I’m not saying you actually do, but that’s how those comments come off wtihout additional context.
Someone saying “I believe in science.” could mean that they blindly believe whatever someone in a white coat says, but could also mean they believe that the scientific method is the ultimate tool of truth discovery, or someone who believes that science, collectively, is able to eventually root out incorrect information via reproducible studies. It’s an ambiguous saying.
A majority of people actually believe in science without any understanding. That’s why so many bullshit articles start with sentences such as “scientists say”, “a study proved”, “according to science” and it convinces people. When a guy like Stephen Hawkins said that aliens exist because he believes so, every alien-believer started using it everywhere as proof that aliens exist: they exist because a “scientist dude” said so. No one cares about protocols, meta-analysis, etc, because it is not rational but a blind belief; most don’t even know how science is done and what a protocol is.
And I’d top that off by saying that anyone knowing how science works, knows that any “truth” of science is very likely to be wrong until decades and decades of additional studies. But people take the hottest latest studies and start venerating them as if they can never be wrong. No rationality, no bayesianism, just an almost religious vision of science.
Which is my point, you don’t believe in science, you understand its purpose and take information it provides rationally
I get that there is an almost religious dogmatism in some parts of science, and if that is the aspect you are referring to, then I don’t disagree, but your statements without context come across as a religious person who begrudgingly accepts that science can be right about certain things but view the whole thing with perhaps an unreasonable skepticism. I’m not saying you actually do, but that’s how those comments come off wtihout additional context.
Someone saying “I believe in science.” could mean that they blindly believe whatever someone in a white coat says, but could also mean they believe that the scientific method is the ultimate tool of truth discovery, or someone who believes that science, collectively, is able to eventually root out incorrect information via reproducible studies. It’s an ambiguous saying.
A majority of people actually believe in science without any understanding. That’s why so many bullshit articles start with sentences such as “scientists say”, “a study proved”, “according to science” and it convinces people. When a guy like Stephen Hawkins said that aliens exist because he believes so, every alien-believer started using it everywhere as proof that aliens exist: they exist because a “scientist dude” said so. No one cares about protocols, meta-analysis, etc, because it is not rational but a blind belief; most don’t even know how science is done and what a protocol is.
And I’d top that off by saying that anyone knowing how science works, knows that any “truth” of science is very likely to be wrong until decades and decades of additional studies. But people take the hottest latest studies and start venerating them as if they can never be wrong. No rationality, no bayesianism, just an almost religious vision of science.