Do you Compartmentalize?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-05-2016, 08:25 AM
RE: Do you Compartmentalize?
(11-05-2016 08:22 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(11-05-2016 08:12 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  It’s that thing called utility that drives science, not the pursuit of truth for truth sake, or some blind and idealic commitment to this. This is just the fairy tale we tell ourselves.
Please tell me what utility drove people to theorise that the planets revolved around the Earth?

Please tell me the utility of stratified L-spaces - I asked my masters supervisor this and he said to get back to him if I ever found one.

Please tell me the utility of the theory of relativity - I don't dispute that it *has* proved useful, I want to know how Einstein decided to study this particular thing for its utility before ever knowing about the technological advances it would bring (he didn't even see most of them, like GPS).

Please tell me the utility of the theory of evolution. Why did Charles Darwin decide that this particular theory would be useful.

You are so full of shit.

Quote:It does appear that for some demystifying science, equates to preaching despair and hopelessness. Which perhaps says more about those who feel this way, than about any comments that I've made.

You're an idiot. You aren't "demystifying science". We've studied various branches of science. You have claimed that you "science" (sic) which turned out to be "worked as some kind of HR person at a pharmacy company". What other grandiose delusions do you harbour?

What you are demystifying is your cognitive dissonance.

I'm still trying to figure out the utility to mankind of identifying and describing a new species of Spinatrypa from the Late Devonian of New York State.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
11-05-2016, 08:25 AM
RE: Do you Compartmentalize?
Oh Tommy, please tell me the utility of space exploration and the new Kepler telescope that was in the news for finding exoplanets? Is it purely for the joy of seeing religious idiots tear their hair out? 'Cos I'd pay money for that.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
11-05-2016, 08:25 AM
RE: Do you Compartmentalize?
Utility drives science. Consider That sounds a lot like 'the only thing that drives science is utility'.

What about simple curiosity?

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Anjele's post
11-05-2016, 08:29 AM
RE: Do you Compartmentalize?
(11-05-2016 08:25 AM)Anjele Wrote:  Utility drives science. Consider That sounds a lot like 'the only thing that drives science is utility'.

What about simple curiosity?

Goddammit! I don't do research on Late Devonian mass extinction because I want to or because I am "curious" or because it seems like an interesting problem to engage in, I do it because I am employed by a university to study that and only that because the university has a vested interest in me finding out that the extinction was caused by...I don't know...fish farts?

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
11-05-2016, 08:31 AM
RE: Do you Compartmentalize?
Just thought I would drop in a comment so I can watch as Tomasia ignores me like he always does.

I am keeping a tally...research, as it were.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Anjele's post
11-05-2016, 08:34 AM
RE: Do you Compartmentalize?
(11-05-2016 08:31 AM)Anjele Wrote:  Just thought I would drop in a comment so I can watch as Tomasia ignores me like he always does.

I am keeping a tally...research, as it were.

Rate and frequency of theist ignorance: online study of the occurrence of a single specimen of theist ignoring comments that run contra to their personally held biases and expose their ignorance

I don't know where we will publish it, but it probably can't be published because we don't have a "boss" predetermining our conclusion for us. Laugh out load

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
11-05-2016, 08:39 AM
RE: Do you Compartmentalize?
(11-05-2016 08:12 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  You mean when a religious person was right and a scientist was wrong?

Don't be absurd. Where the religious answer to a problem was correct and science was wrong.

Religion said thunderstorms were the work of the gods.
Science gave us meteorology and (somewhat) accurate weather prediction.

Religion said that disease was a punishment from the gods.
Science gave us the Germ Theory.

(11-05-2016 08:12 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  I’d have you clarify with some other questions though:.

Are there scientific truths about reality, and non-scientific truths about reality?

Religion deals in "truths". There are facts about reality. These facts are used by science.

(11-05-2016 08:12 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Are all truths about reality scientific truths?

That's the same question you just asked.

(11-05-2016 08:12 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Or do they only become scientific truths, after they been tested extensively, and confirmed by a variety of scientists, who published the results in a peer review journal?

There is no "truth". There is our understanding and perception of reality. Science supports what we perceive.

(11-05-2016 08:12 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  If science verifies that a common religious answer, is valid, truthful, does this answer then become a scientific answer, as opposed to a religious ones?

Yes. Science describes reality and helps us understand it.

Unfortunately for you, religion defines itself as outside that reality. If science gave properties to a "god" religions would likely disavow said deity.

(11-05-2016 08:12 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  If the religious answer was right, and the answer derived by a variety of researchers was wrong, in such a scenario, wouldn’t you just say they didn’t evaluate the question properly, conduct the research in an effective manner. Because if they did, they would have confirmed the religious answer?

Religion does not conduct scientific research. Prayer does not scientifically prove anything. If you guess the correct answer by chance, it does not mean your guesswork was a valid method of determining reality. It means you got lucky.

(11-05-2016 08:12 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  It’s that thing called utility that drives science, not the pursuit of truth for truth sake, or some blind and idealic commitment to this. This is just the fairy tale we tell ourselves.

Except that we have scientists that we can talk to and they don't agree with you.

(11-05-2016 08:12 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  It does appear that for some demystifying science, equates to preaching despair and hopelessness. Which perhaps says more about those who feel this way, than about any comments that I've made.

Who on this forum has indicated that? No one here is mystifying science, so your "demystification" is another strawman.

The only despair and hopelessness seems to be coming from you. Yet another subconscious projection I suppose.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
11-05-2016, 09:42 AM
RE: Do you Compartmentalize?
(11-05-2016 07:43 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Science defines what scientists do, scientists DON'T define what science is by doing whatever they want.

That’s just magical thinking. Science is purely human endeavor, defined by what scientists do. If scientists don’t define what scientists do, then who does? Science? Science is not a being, it defines nothing.

Quote:No, that is where conflict of interest can occur for companies that employ technicians who use methods derived by science to produce a product.

Companies that employee scientists. Are you trying to suggest the scientists they employee are not scientists but technicians? Are you gonna engage in a bit of no true scotsman here, and suggest that scientist that work for private industries, are not true scientist? And perhaps only the handful who work in public sector, in academia qualify as scientists?

Quote:Scientists work within the context and framework of the peer reviewed scientific method. This isn't a no true scotsman, nor is it even a generalized statement. It is what the definition is for a scientist.

Fewer than 1% of scientists manage to publish a paper in any given year. Those seeking to get published, are seeking to appeal to the editorial boards of any particular journal, by producing studies the editorial boards find “sexy”, appealing to their reader base, draws attention to their particular journal, gets media attentions, increases their brand recognition. The sort of editorial decisions dictate the sort of studies that get published, these publications have an interest in the research as well as the results too. Research and conclusions that would likely entice further readership. These journals are not particularly interested in whether your particular study holds valid upon reproduction, hence why when these studies are researched independently, they fail more often than succeed on replication. These journals are also bias, in preferring studies that yield positive results, over negative ones.

Quote:The reality is that many people hold science degrees and work for organizations performing tests, but these people are better classified as science TECHNICIANS as opposed to SCIENTISTS.

No true scotsman fallacy.

At this rate, we might as well only consider about 1/10 of those who devoted themselves to acquiring advance science degrees, as scientists. And I don't think the large swath of these individuals who work for private industries, who strived as hard as everyone else to obtain their degrees, would say they're not scientist.


Quote:Their research is NOT defined by or assigned by the university. There is no pressure to do a certain type of test, reach a specific conclusion, or push the university's agenda (whatever that may be). The researcher is not beholden to the university with respect to their scientific research.

The university has an explicit interest in why they fund such research in the first place. You serve their interest, regardless if your aware of it or not. They don't pay the bills, so that you can do whatever you want. Your purpose whether you're aware of it or not, is to increase enrollment, to increase the university prestige, it's ranking, etc.... You're an entirely a tool in this endeavor, nor is it required that you acknowledge this, for it to be true. Universities don't fund research programs, for selfless reasons. Only in your imagination is this true.

Quote:YOU don't understand how science actually works nor how the scientific community polices itself.

And you don't understand how larger organizations that foot the bill work, because you're a tool, living in a fantasy world of your own making.

Quote:Once again, this is patently false. Academic institutions don't hire research scientists to keep them beholden to an agenda. Once again, this is why TENURE is a thing that exists too.

Your beholden to their agenda. They don't fund your research, for selfless reasons. They foot the bill for entirely selfish reasons, because they serve the interest of the universities themselves. The tool need not acknowledge this though.

Quote:But you also clearly don't know how scientists are hired at academic institutions. Scientists (the other research faculty) in a department are the ones who do the interviewing and decide on which candidate gets the job. The scientists within academia, are beholden (with respect to their science) to their peers. Department heads are SCIENTISTS. Faculty are SCIENTISTS. Departments run themselves and they are populated by SCIENTISTS.

I know enough to debunk your belief in this self-contained, autonomous department, as nothing more than elaborate fictions you tell yourself.

Quote:Attracting donors. Yep, departments and universities are definitely interested in that. And no, that doesn't change how or what science the researchers do. Instead, they promote the research they are already doing to attract donors or alumni donations.

Whether you like it or not a universities research department the type of studies that get funded, have to be able to attract donors, increase enrollment, serve the universities bottom line. You as an employee of that university don't have to know that of course, those a part of organizational management do. If you're failing in this regard you'd likely get the boot, or have funding withdrawn.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-05-2016, 09:44 AM
RE: Do you Compartmentalize?
(11-05-2016 07:41 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  There is no compelling evidence to suggest that the scientific method and peer review eliminate individual bias.

If you have a strong bias going into an observation, there's little reason to believe that this would be eliminated in the process of peer review. In fact just like here and else where, if we have strong biases we'd likely buckle down on those beliefs regardless.

How exactly, (provide references) for how you know this, with multiple examples.
It's not "we", you idiot. It's competitors, who would like nothing better, than shoot down the theories of their competitors.

Thanks for proving yet again, you have not one clue what's coming out of your ass.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
11-05-2016, 10:14 AM (This post was last modified: 11-05-2016 10:19 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Do you Compartmentalize?
(11-05-2016 09:44 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  How exactly, (provide references) for how you know this, with multiple examples.
It's not "we", you idiot. It's competitors, who would like nothing better, than shoot down the theories of their competitors.

Thanks for proving yet again, you have not one clue what's coming out of your ass.

Surely if there's a particular study, conducted by an organization, that has a competitor that stands to gain by discrediting that study, and has the money and resources to do so, they likely will work on discrediting that study. Think of all those scientists working for oil companies attempting to discredit a variety of unfavorable studies.

1.5 million studies get published every year, very few of them likely to draw incentived competitors, and would likely involve a series of zero-sum games if engaged.

Quote:How exactly, (provide references) for how you know this, with multiple examples.

So you want me to prove a negative? That there's no compelling evidence in support of the belief that biases and prejudices get eliminated in process of doing science?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: