• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -11 year ago

    It’s better to say that science tries to become more correct than to say it is proven wrong.

    Exactly, or proven right. Science is the process of developing models which more closely approximate the world we see. It’s a fantastic tool for doing that, and the best tool we have for improving knowledge overall. But it cannot support absolute declarations. There is always the possibility that a future theory shows inadequacies in the present one.

    People like you seem to think that our present theories are fundamentally special, that we’ve reached the pinnacle of knowledge. What’s the difference between you, and the highly educated scientists over the centuries who laughed at far-fetched theories that we use today?

    Do I think astrology is a particularly useful or accurate model? No, not really. But once you start down the path of absolutism it slithers bit by bit into more and more uncertain topics. It’s a troubling trend that turns otherwise intelligent people into fundamentalists.

    Acknowledging the potential of a theory I don’t personally believe is a small price to pay for mental hygiene.

        • @20hzservers
          link
          1
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          You’re way too worked up over this topic. Name calling that other guy and “I’ve done way more math than you.”… Bro you need to get off the uppers. Look in a mirror.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            111 months ago

            Homie, I was civil up to the moment he started acting like an ass, far past that. I didn’t call anyone anything until he did. Dude needs to reexamine himself, you can join him.

            • @20hzservers
              link
              111 months ago

              Naw bro you sarcastically called him omniscient first. Have a good day.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                111 months ago

                Yes, because he resolutely claimed absolute certainty, making sweeping, unsubstantiated statements that were just demonstrably false. That’s just fundamentally unscientific. My comment was more of a rhetoric device than name-calling.

                I don’t give half a shit about astrology, what I am passionate about is flippant, unsubstantiated certainty pretending to be scientific thought. It’s, as I’ve said, a brain rot that undercuts the very principles of science. It makes people arrogant, needlessly shuts down thought, and just generally makes a farce of the scientific method. It’s not science, it’s science fundamentalism, science apologism. It’s a poison worth fighting.