I mean, you can’t test everything. And no, following the latest science doesn’t count. Which leaves us authoritarianisming it up like medieval troglodytes.
What do you mean by scientific Sidestyle? Can you try to rephrase your question?
Submitted 1 year ago by dope@lemm.ee to [deleted]
I mean, you can’t test everything. And no, following the latest science doesn’t count. Which leaves us authoritarianisming it up like medieval troglodytes.
What do you mean by scientific Sidestyle? Can you try to rephrase your question?
All science is based on observations whose veracity can’t be completely proven. You may be a brain in a vat and all your life experiences are illusions. All you can do is make sense of the world with respect to your observations and have faith that it is an accurate representation of reality.
Science is still better than religion of guessing because in science you are looking for logical consistency. Even if your worldview is false, at least it will be in accordance with itself.
That’s nice, but how about my question?
Your question is really vague; I think that’s one reason people are having a hard time answering. What do you mean by “lifestyle”? Can you give some specific examples of areas or ways in which you want to apply science to your everyday life?
Scientific lifestyle as in independent verification of everything? No that’s impossible, scientists can’t even do that in their fields. Society requires trust to function.
So call it “scientific authoritarianism”?
If you really want to view it that way, but it’s more about trust structures than outright authoritarianism. It’s not blindly believing the “science authority” it’s having oversight bodies and watch dog organizations to call out when things don’t smell right.
Yes, it is. Me and most people on the planet live a scientific lifestyle, the last time humans didn’t was known as the dark ages. Don’t believe me? Then why haven’t you jumped in front of a train or exiting skyscrapers through the window? The reason is the enormous amount of scientific evidence that tells you otherwise, and no matter how much unscientific people think they are they still follow th scientific method every day for all facets of their life without noticing, they just decide that this or that does not need the same amount of scrutiny that they put on their ability to survive a 100m fall.
But the vast majority of us don’t “follow the scientific method”. But we do is place our trust in scientific authority. That’s quite a different thing.
So do you think you don’t have enough evidence that jumping out of a skyscraper will kill you? Do you need to conduce experiments by yourself? Or do you trust on the scientific authorities for this?.
If you trust them for this, why not trust them for other things? And if you don’t why not jump of a skyscraper?
So should we conduct our own experiment as to whether getting hit by a train is in fact fatal?
Why would anyone want to test everything? That seems like a huge waste of time
Yes, how silly that would be.
What a remarkably helpful answer 🙄
Just have a little faith.
jeffw@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What?
dope@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Woof
user224@lemmy.sdf.org 1 year ago
Meow?