Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34
  1. #21
    Hung Angel Platinum Poster trish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The United Fuckin' States of America
    Posts
    13,898

    Default Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson, the astrophysics genius, speaks on discrimination.

    I would say that when Einstein wrote Roosevelt informing him of the possibility of a nuclear weapon, he was not doing science but rather doing what he could to sway a wartime policy decision. He was informed by science, yes...but acting as a citizen outside his professional capacity.

    Scientists who who insert themselves into the discussion on climate change, vaccines, and other matters may at best be informed by science but insofar as they take it upon themselves to recommend specific legislative solutions (I think) act as citizens outside their professional capacities; their expertise is in a particular field of science...not politics. I'm not saying we shouldn't listen to them, but rather we should know that policy should be informed by science but it is not a matter that is entirely subject to scientific analysis.


    Last edited by trish; 10-07-2015 at 10:00 PM.
    "...I no longer believe that people's secrets are defined and communicable, or their feelings full-blown and easy to recognize."_Alice Munro, Chaddeleys and Flemings.

    "...the order in creation which you see is that which you have put there, like a string in a maze, so that you shall not lose your way". _Judge Holden, Cormac McCarthy's, BLOOD MERIDIAN.

  2. #22
    Hung Angel Platinum Poster trish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The United Fuckin' States of America
    Posts
    13,898

    Default Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson, the astrophysics genius, speaks on discrimination.

    Quote Originally Posted by broncofan View Post
    I realize this is the argument Republicans put forth when they talk about climate change! That's certainly not what I want to evoke. But scientists might want to write popular science books out of vanity, but there is the risk that they are really creeping towards domains of study that are not purely scientific but pretending they are. Or rather implicitly saying that their scientific credentials give them special insight into social problems.
    I agree, this certainly seems to be a danger. I wouldn't want to tell anyone they shouldn't write, but authors should be aware that what is written is always open to spin and interpretation. Readers should be aware that you can't always believe what you read. YouTube watchers should....oh well we're all fucked anyway!


    "...I no longer believe that people's secrets are defined and communicable, or their feelings full-blown and easy to recognize."_Alice Munro, Chaddeleys and Flemings.

    "...the order in creation which you see is that which you have put there, like a string in a maze, so that you shall not lose your way". _Judge Holden, Cormac McCarthy's, BLOOD MERIDIAN.

  3. #23
    Senior Member Platinum Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    13,473

    Default Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson, the astrophysics genius, speaks on discrimination.

    Quote Originally Posted by trish View Post
    I would say that when Einstein wrote Roosevelt informing him of the possibility of a nuclear weapon, he was not doing science but rather doing what he could to sway a wartime policy decision. He was informed by science, yes...but acting as a citizen outside his professional capacity.

    Scientists who who insert themselves into the discussion on climate change, vaccines, and other matters may at best be informed by science but insofar as they take it upon themselves to recommend specific legislative solutions (I think) act as citizens outside their professional capacities; their expertise is in a particular field of science...not politics. I'm not saying we shouldn't listen to them, but rather we should know that policy should be informed by science but it is not a matter that is entirely subject to scientific analysis.
    But just as in the past people might have turned to a priest for guidance on matters -as indeed many still do (and in other religions)- so many people today are, I think, more likely to believe what a scientist has to say about climate change than a politician, as well as on other matters. I am not saying that scientists are the new priesthood -an idea that has been knocking around for a while- but I think you can see where a belief that science is concerned with facts adds moral weight to their position and unless the audience knows where scientists disagree and how and on what, they continue to have the authority of the expert to buttress their preferred policy. Science may not do morality, many scientists do.


    1 out of 1 members liked this post.

  4. #24
    5 Star Poster sukumvit boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    los angeles area
    Posts
    2,241

    Default Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson, the astrophysics genius, speaks on discrimination.

    Looks like they are calling it the 'New Atheism' and the new atheists are the usual suspects already mentioned above.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism



  5. #25
    Hung Angel Platinum Poster trish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The United Fuckin' States of America
    Posts
    13,898

    Default Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson, the astrophysics genius, speaks on discrimination.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stavros View Post
    But just as in the past people might have turned to a priest for guidance on matters -as indeed many still do (and in other religions)- so many people today are, I think, more likely to believe what a scientist has to say about climate change than a politician, as well as on other matters. I am not saying that scientists are the new priesthood -an idea that has been knocking around for a while- but I think you can see where a belief that science is concerned with facts adds moral weight to their position and unless the audience knows where scientists disagree and how and on what, they continue to have the authority of the expert to buttress their preferred policy. Science may not do morality, many scientists do.
    I think we largely agree. If the issue is important, then it is important to check relevant assertions against fact as much as is possible and to understand as well as possible the grounding of any assertion, be it scientific, literary, historical, political etc. Otherwise, invoking a celebrity or scientist’s name is just resorting to an argument by authority. Surely Stephen Hawking’s endorsement, in most matters outside the realm of mathematics or physics, should carry no greater weight than that of any other person’s who is also known in their specific field of endeavor for their intellectual integrity and creative capacities. It’s not the endorsement that should count, but the reasons given for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by sukumvit boy View Post
    Looks like they are calling it the 'New Atheism' and the new atheists are the usual suspects already mentioned above.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism
    I prefer Julia Sweeney and recommend her heartfelt stand up album: And God Said Ha!
    She hits many of the same points as the New Atheists, but with a whole lot less testosterone. Instead of calling out theists, she narrates her own story and in the course explains why she is not one - at least in the traditional sense.


    1 out of 1 members liked this post.
    "...I no longer believe that people's secrets are defined and communicable, or their feelings full-blown and easy to recognize."_Alice Munro, Chaddeleys and Flemings.

    "...the order in creation which you see is that which you have put there, like a string in a maze, so that you shall not lose your way". _Judge Holden, Cormac McCarthy's, BLOOD MERIDIAN.

  6. #26
    Silver Poster hippifried's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    3,968

    Default Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson, the astrophysics genius, speaks on discrimination.

    Quote Originally Posted by trish View Post
    Yeah, you're right. He put it in orbit around star along with eight planets and a billions of asteroids. Even though Pluto is massive enough to have naturally settled into a roughly spherical shape (geologists say it's in hydrostatic equilibrium) it's not massive enough to have swept it's orbit clear of those pesky asteroids. For some reason the International Astronomical Union (one of those fucking pinko unions trying to second guess God) decided that to be a planet it's not good enough to be round and orbiting a star...you have to be a fucking broom too. Some astronomers call Pluto a dwarf planet but still don't include it in the pantheon of planets. Yikes! That's like saying a dwarf human isn't a human!!

    I like to think of Pluto as a reasonably good candidate who just didn't quite get the job because of it's poor debris sweeping skills. (Damn company should provide some on the job learning, don't ya think?)
    Well yeah, but all the others got a head start, & the yellow dog had a much longer runway to vacuum. This is discrimination plain & simple. They're all just pickin' on the runt of the litter. Pluto may be an adolescent, but that just makes it a work in progress. From what I've seen, the debris field is already gathering & gettin' ready to crash dance like marbles in a ring. In 3d of course. I figure it shouldn't take more than a billion years or 2 for the chaos to work lts magic. The blink of an eye in the space time continuum. Lets make it a date. I'll see if I can wrangle up a couple of front row tickets. Better bundle up. I hear lt's cold out there.

    Now what's all this about morality vs science? Are they really exclusive? Anthropology is a science. The study of human behavior is a science. When you break it down, morality is the golden rule. If a topic can't be related back to that, then it's not a moral issue. Hilel, Rabbi from Babylon circa 100 BCE, said: "That which displeases you, do not to your fellow. That is the whole Torah. All else is explanation. Go and learn." Throughout our history, nearly every major philosopher, prophet, medicine man, etc..., has preached the same moral code. Where did it come from you ask? Personally, after giving it some thought, I think it's innate. It's a survival tool that keeps our species going by allowing us to live in close proximity to each other without bringing about our own extinction. We humans are not fast, not strong, & bereft of fang or claw. Without the code, we're just prey.



  7. #27
    Senior Member Platinum Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    13,473

    Default Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson, the astrophysics genius, speaks on discrimination.

    Hippifried you may have come across the advance notices of 'sensational news' about Pluto from NASA, and may already be in the public domain by the time you read this. I am transferring my thoughts on God to the thread on God fearing if you and anyone else wants to take that further there.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/sc...-a6685786.html



  8. #28
    Gold Poster
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,699

    Default Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson, the astrophysics genius, speaks on discrimination.

    I think hard science has limits but I am glad when they are not filled in with religion but secular philosophy or social science. Whereas science can't explain everything, I don't think religion can explain anything except for personal information about the doctrine's authors and the people who slavishly follow it. Any rule derived from a false narrative can be derived from common sense. But this too begins to meld with the other thread.

    I will point out that many dangers of science often come from not adhering to a rigorous scientific methodology (think alchemy, craniometry, eugenicism). The shortcomings of religion come from adhering too closely to the written text (think proscriptions against homosexuality and various draconian punishments). This is at least one advantage of science over religion imo.


    2 out of 2 members liked this post.

  9. #29
    Hung Angel Platinum Poster trish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The United Fuckin' States of America
    Posts
    13,898

    Default Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson, the astrophysics genius, speaks on discrimination.

    I will point out that many dangers of science often come from not adhering to a rigorous scientific methodology (think alchemy, craniometry, eugenicism).
    Or you can google the Wikipedia article Scientific Misconduct and get arm-length list of very specific recent examples of cheats and frauds that infect academic and corporate research organizations.

    You make an interesting point. For some reason (and I don’t know how long this will last into the future) the frauds that have been booted out of science have not been able to establish themselves as successful independent “churches”. Religion, on the other hand, has been plagued with schisms that grow into whole other religions. One reason this hasn’t happened yet in the sciences is because of the empirical nature of the endeavor. One reason it hasn’t happened in mathematics is because of its strict adherence to rigorous proof. There are pressures, however, that may cause both to drift away from these anchors. There is a growing speculative trend in science (as experimentation becomes more difficult, more expensive and more difficult to fund). The dangers of corporate science (pharmaceutical research etc.) are obvious. Even in mathematics, rigorous proof is giving way to computational studies. Since the solution of the four color problem there’s been an ongoing debate about the validity and nature of computer proofs too complex for a single individual to follow and comprehend.


    2 out of 2 members liked this post.
    "...I no longer believe that people's secrets are defined and communicable, or their feelings full-blown and easy to recognize."_Alice Munro, Chaddeleys and Flemings.

    "...the order in creation which you see is that which you have put there, like a string in a maze, so that you shall not lose your way". _Judge Holden, Cormac McCarthy's, BLOOD MERIDIAN.

  10. #30
    Hung Angel Platinum Poster trish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The United Fuckin' States of America
    Posts
    13,898

    Default Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson, the astrophysics genius, speaks on discrimination.

    Just thought of some counter examples to my last post. Homeopathy and some similar movements related to the medical sciences might be considered successful (but not by any scientific measure) para-schisms.


    "...I no longer believe that people's secrets are defined and communicable, or their feelings full-blown and easy to recognize."_Alice Munro, Chaddeleys and Flemings.

    "...the order in creation which you see is that which you have put there, like a string in a maze, so that you shall not lose your way". _Judge Holden, Cormac McCarthy's, BLOOD MERIDIAN.

Similar Threads

  1. Transgender model Ines Rau with Tyson Beckford
    By Imakeiteazy in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-08-2015, 05:34 PM
  2. Who's The GENIUS Behind The New Forum Rules....
    By Nautica in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-04-2010, 05:36 PM
  3. Tyson To Pose Nude For August Issue Of Playgirl
    By PapiQueRico in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-02-2008, 07:56 AM
  4. Bill Hicks- A rare comic genius
    By LG in forum Politics and Religion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-29-2007, 01:52 AM
  5. twisted genius
    By chefmike in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-21-2005, 03:33 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •