Quote:
Originally Posted by freeztar
Do you feel that science is close-minded?
|
First of all, science has no mind. Science is a method. I would say that the scientific method is closed to conjecture or speculation as qualifying evidence in support of a theory.
The scientific community may appear closed minded in their rejection of certain claims. But I would posit that that arrises out of protectionism of scientific integrity. I mean, consider the vast amount of unsupported conjecture presented as truth or fact that circulates through societies worldwide distorting perception. The scientific community is obligated to demand that information be properly categorized relative to how well it can be substantiated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderbird
No, but the scientific community has institutions the can become compartmentalized in their group think and subsequently become defensive, its human nature.
|
One's awareness of this is relative to how at odds their position or belief is relative to the general consensus. If your understanding or opinion is consistent with a majority position, concerns of group think are typically unrecognized.
The truth is, IMHO, it is the one who is of the minority opinion that is most often taking a defensive stance. It only makes sense considering they are likely to face a greater challenge, have more to prove, and are likely to feel ganged upon. From a scientific standpoint, one with a minority opinion is likely lacking empirical evidence in support of their position. If the evidence were there, they likely would find that they are with the consensus.
If someone regularly finds themselves at odds with the consensus, than it may be worthwhile for them to examine whether they are really adopting valid positions, or just resisting the consensus based on personal issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderbird
However….. If the people are ignorant of science its not just the public to blame as just to dumb to understand, but the lack sensitivity toward the public by the scientific community to take responsibility that science is a public trust not an elite class in itself. This attitude is being amplified on this forum more and more lately.
|
The scientific community is not obligated to the sensitivities of the general public. They are obligated to producing legitimate, defensible, facts and information to support hypotheses and theories. Their intent is to weed out the conjecture, and falsify invalid calims so as to be clear about what the data and facts imply. The same applies here at Hypography.
Charges of elitism in the scientific community, I tend to think, are made by those who find their beliefs rejected by the science. It would seem odd for someone who's beliefs are supported by science to then turn around and accuse the science of being elitist.
