Eugh.
I mean, it’s not wrong, but this has the energy of a Facebook meme for people who make atheism their entire personality.
If I saw someone with this mug I would probably avoid them.
Eugh.
I mean, it’s not wrong, but this has the energy of a Facebook meme for people who make atheism their entire personality.
If I saw someone with this mug I would probably avoid them.
The comments about this cup are funny in how pedantic they, given the point of the cup to me is the spirit of it. It is not surprising to see the science positive crowd be so analytic about it though, and actually slightly reassuring.
Bruh my grandma gave me this mug like 10 years ago. The same one that believes high schools were installing litter boxes for students.
What about political science? Psychology?
Science isn't an ontology, it's a method.
God, what no humanities does to a mf
Exactly. I keep trying to get people to understand that it's a process, just like running is a process.
And a method in which beliefs are important. Not the religious ones, of course, but there are other kinds of beliefs.
Scientism is the belief that science and the scientific method are the best or only way to render truth about the world and reality.
While the term was defined originally to mean "methods and attitudes typical of or attributed to natural scientists", some scholars, as well as political and religious leaders, have also adopted it as a pejorative term with the meaning "an exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science applied to all areas of investigation (as in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities)".
Believing that science yields universally true results or is the only method of finding truths, however, is an ontology and something you have to believe.
Edit: I'm not anti-science or anything, just a pedant.
Believing that science yields universally true results or is the only method of finding truths
You just described science as though it were a belief system. In reality, science has a presumption that your ideals are false, not true. And a person who could only discover truth through science wouldn't be able to dress or feed themselves.
I agree with the second part of that sentence, but who would think that they discover universal truths or any truths at all? The whole premise of science is that we cannot verify anything or find any real truth. We can just show that anything else is much more unlikely to be true.
Here is a video by the channel Dr. Fatima (former astrophysicist) which I think has some intersection with this topic. I may have picked the wrong video though because I haven't watched it in months.
I saw this earlier and really wanted to pipe up, but I just couldn't bear it.
"facts don't care about your feelings" energy
explain the problem: irrational criticism & fallacies aren't scientific
I don’t believe I have ever had an interaction with you that was not the most annoying part of my day
Cool: consequence of your outputting irrational comments. I'm still debunking them.
I’m pretty confident that you already know exactly what I was getting at
Your propagation of the misinformed confusion of unrelated concepts?
problem?
seems like you're drawing on a guilt by association fallacy
Is there anyone out there who hates Ben Shapiro and the temperamental cranks who act like their subjective appeals to emotion & outrage have anywhere as much merit as valid, objective arguments that take actual effort? The latter is tiresome, and they absolutely deserve Ben's catchphrase: everyone should be appropriating it to nobler causes than Ben's to annoy him & criticize those irrational twerps.
Haha science takes more faith to believe in than my religion.
/s
Sent from my iPhone
I guess prayer and ritual made the device possible, eh?
LOL!
Yep that's the joke, although I should probably have made it more obvious given that it's the internet and there are real people who probably post this sort of stuff sincerely.
/s aside, what it takes to use science is mental discipline, not faith.
The placebo effect would like a word.
That's medicine. Science just sees it as a problem to be sorted by good study design and statistics
Until you turn your head and stop observing, and then it reverts back to mysticism. :-P

You're referring to quantum effects? Don't worry about whether you're not watching, the universe is watching. If one photon is emitted from the thing in a quantum state and hits anything, that's the observation
Actually, "science" is a human activity and must care about what you think. It's the universe that doesn't care about either.
Unless it's like... Sociology, or Psychology. They care what you believe.
This feels very 2011
This is mostly shared as an arrogant statement towards laymen, but really, it's a reminder for scientists themselves
No matter what you think or believe your experiment should yield, reality check is always waiting around the corner.
Nice, when seen in this light!
This is "scienceism".
Technically correct since science is a concept and doesn't have feelings, unlike animals, and possibly plants, fungi, all forms of life, who knows, rocks? Idk.
yeah, about that...yer funding...it comes in part from some of those anti-science folk... :/
But is light particle or wave?
Everything is a wave if you dig deep enough.
At least, as far as we know right now. But the standard model and quantum field theory have been really solid with really precise predictions for many decades at this point. (not any kind of expert here, just find it interesting)
Everything goes through our brains and therefore filters and interpretations. Science doesn't happen if grants are approved and that usually means someone has something to gain. Even then, results are skewed by method and biases.
Science very much does care about our feelings, both individual and collective, every step of the way. That's why there needs to be special care to take them out as much as possible.
Plus, statistics make up the basis of pretty much all of our science. If you dig into the foundations of stats, you'll find that it's basically just formalizing our feelings. It just happens to be formalized in a way that appears to reflect reality accurately enough to be useful.
Science cares if your beliefs make you vote for someone who defunds research.
This post would be greater with accessibility.
That handle is on the wrong side, unless it's for someone who is left handed.
It might be printed on both sides
Maybe it's a personal reminder to the drinker
I'm right handed, but often find myself with the cup in my left hand, because I need my dominant hand for high dexterity tasks, like writing, operating computer mouse, etc.
When I pointed this out to a very popular influencer last week I got doxxed by them. Luckily after a week of people trying to fuck with my account they deleted the message.
"Its just my opinion"
No. Science isn't about opinions. Its facts and nothing else.
If you're putting your opinion in science, its no longer science.
In Chile, in 1960, after the great Valdivia earthquake, in a small beach town in southern Chile, to "calm the seas" after the tsunami, a mapuche machi (chilean indigenous people; chaman), did a human sacrifice, killing a little child, they were absolved because they "were acting in accordance of an extreme fear of their gods of their belief", and it angers me always so much that story.
When they tell me to respect other people's believes, I always think of that case, is then OK to kill children if you say is to "calm your angered gods?" Apparently yes, fuck that no I won't accept people believeing in bullshit.
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrificio_humano_del_5_de_junio_de_1960_en_Chile?wprov=sfla1 here is the Wikipedia of the incident, seemingly there is no English wikipedia, so use translate if you don't know Spanish.
Science isn't a belief system. It's a way of making sense of natural phenomena.
Science is knowledge discovered through the scientific process. Knowledge isn't belief.
we define "science" as the aggregate consciousness of scientific researchers
This is something I wish I could preach convincingly to everyone. The activity of scientists, a social group, are arguing and trying to convince one another that their interpretation of the data acquired by using their tools and methods is what become a scientific consensus.
Forefronting the method (often a vaguely defined one rooted in a hypo-deductive model from about 150 years ago that most people learned in grade school) removes the relationships between people and other people and people and institutions.
I wish I could find the paper but there's a wonderful enthographic study on how scientists interact with each other to transform the discourse.
Edit: Found it! Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry by Helen E. Longino
The only fuck Science gives is on/in the other end, Like at the Cortex Relay's battle for the Truth 's broadcast.
Some people just don't understand what some words mean. Some people think they no everything. Some people think that they are limited to any arbitrary awareness dimensions that they know of. Some people think there are only a certain number of dimensions.
Some people Fly Fire like it's obviously the only way physics work and they they know what matter is.
Some people ask questions. Some people SkewEl and tell people they know.
Sum people just do the math ;but what dimensions is/are Math relevant to?
I have 2 of these in my cupboard, given to me as a gift on two separate occasions from different people.
It's like they know me or something.
science is religion with extra steps but more open and less bloat.
all 17 comments