Opinion Truth, science and a dash of religion

[GremioPower]

“Post-truth” is such a meaningless expression, isn’t it?

Stephen A. Smith is not a journalist. He is either a jester or a clown — depending on whether he is willing to use his position to say inconvenient truths (a jester) or only entertaining nonsense (a clown).

 

[chiwigi]

“Post-truth” is such a meaningless expression, isn’t it?

Stephen A. Smith is not a journalist. He is either a jester or a clown — depending on whether he is willing to use his position to say inconvenient truths (a jester) or only entertaining nonsense (a clown).

Not really, it signifies the era we have entered where saying something verifiable has become second fiddle to getting the headline. An era where saying something first and loudly is more important than saying something correct.

Post-truth sums it up perfectly.

 

[GremioPower]

Not really, it signifies the era we have entered where saying something verifiable has become second fiddle to getting the headline. An era where saying something first and loudly is more important than saying something correct.

Post-truth sums it up perfectly.

There can be no post-truth because truth is timeless. We are experiencing a crisis of authority.

It is typical of periods of decadence. It would not be post-truth, but post-ground belief. It is that which has been shaking. It is not as solid as we had taken it to be (it never is), and now we need to reassess that.

Until a new authority manages to establish itself, we will live with this mess. It may be bad, but it is normal. It is a common recurrence in History.

Besides, the current state is not new. It has been happening for a while. We are still dealing with those issues from the XIX and XX Centuries, which were unresolved. We cannot keep postponing them forever.

 

[chiwigi]

There can be no post-truth because truth is timeless. We are experiencing a crisis of authority.

It is typical of periods of decadence. It would not be post-truth, but post-ground belief. It is that which has been shaking. It is not as solid as we had taken it to be (it never is), and now we need to reassess that.

Until a new authority manages to establish itself, we will live with this mess. It may be bad, but it is normal. It is a common recurrence in History.

Besides, the current state is not new. It has been happening for a while. We are still dealing with those issues from the XIX and XX Centuries, which were unresolved. We cannot keep postponing them forever.

No, it's post-truth. People are INTENTIONALLY lying. It isn't that the lack of authority exists (science comfortably fits that category), it is the choice of certain groups to ignore it for political or financial gain and exploit fear and lack of education and fill their heads with nonsense mysticism and religion.

 

[GremioPower]

No, it's post-truth. People are INTENTIONALLY lying. It isn't that the lack of authority exists (science comfortably fits that category), it is the choice of certain groups to ignore it for political or financial gain and exploit fear and lack of education and fill their heads with nonsense mysticism and religion.

Chiwigi, we are saying the same thing. Claims of authority will never disappear. The key is on the effects of such claims. It doesn't matter whether I like it or not. As you said yourself, it's happening!

Why is this happening? There are always causes, but regardless of those, it is natural. It is something that is always bound to happen. And when it happens, things pretty much follow a similar script.

Without an effective authority able to impose itself against it, people can lie and get away with it. You've said yourself, Science was the authority we had. The point is that, culturally speaking, it alone no longer holds water.

Now what, then? Well, it's impossible to go back to the old authority (nor any older one). That simply does never happen. A new authority must be established. I have no idea which one is going to be. Meanwhile, we suffer the consequences of such a void.

 

[chiwigi]

Chiwigi, we are saying the same thing. Claims of authority will never disappear. The key is on the effects of such claims. It doesn't matter whether I like it or not. As you said yourself, it's happening!

Why is this happening? There are always causes, but regardless of those, it is natural. It is something that is always bound to happen. And when it happens, things pretty much follow a similar script.

Without an effective authority able to impose itself against it, people can lie and get away with it. You've said yourself, Science was the authority we had. The point is that, culturally speaking, it alone no longer holds water.

Now what, then? Well, it's impossible to go back to the old authority (nor any older one). That simply does never happen. A new authority must be established. I have no idea which one is going to be. Meanwhile, we suffer the consequences of such a void.

You are the one who has the problem with the perfectly succinct term of 'Post-truth', which is literally what this era of science denial is.
The authority is ******* science, it seeks the truth using a clear, transparent methodology. Even now you are skirting that clear reasoning.

 

[Tredz]

You are the one who has the problem with the perfectly succinct term of 'Post-truth', which is literally what this era of science denial is.
The authority is ******* science, it seeks the truth using a clear, transparent methodology. Even now you are skirting that clear reasoning.

Follow the science! Science is always right...until it's not.

 

[raman]

Follow the science! Science is always right...until it's not.

Science is often wrong. Indeed it wouldn't work if it wasn't. But science self-corrects. Mysticism, religion and conspiracy theory respond to being wrong by mutating into ever fractal wrongness.

 

[Steve Dore]

Follow the science! Science is always right...until it's not.

As raman posted above, science is self correcting. Hypothesis are tested against facts. Theories evolve, and are sometimes completely discarded, as new facts become known. Very different to a system where new "facts" are regularly created to support a belief.

 

[chiwigi]

Follow the science! Science is always right...until it's not.

Science then changes to the evidence, that is why you follow it.

 

[backtozero]

You are the one who has the problem with the perfectly succinct term of 'Post-truth', which is literally what this era of science denial is.
The authority is ******* science, it seeks the truth using a clear, transparent methodology. Even now you are skirting that clear reasoning.

I thought you guys were talking about Stephen A?

 

[backtozero]

Science then changes to the evidence, that is why you follow it.

Not always. Are you familiar with Graham Hancock?

 

[chiwigi]

Not always. Are you familiar with Graham Hancock?

He is NOT a scientist.
Hancock's works propose a connection with a 'mother culture' from which he believes other ancient civilisations sprang.[4] An example of pseudohistory[5] and pseudoarchaeology, his work has neither been peer reviewed nor published in academic journals...LITERALLY THE REQUIREMENT.

 

[Tredz]

As raman posted above, science is self correcting. Hypothesis are tested against facts. Theories evolve, and are sometimes completely discarded, as new facts become known. Very different to a system where new "facts" are regularly created to support a belief.

So it becomes a cyclical argument - science is ALWAYS right - until its not, and it's not when a consensus says its not...until it is. The frustration many free thinking individuals have is being told "you don't agree? you have a different point of view? You're skeptical? Shut-up, you're an idiot, the science is in, follow the science" (paraphrased). Similarly with conspiracy theories - they're always "crazy" until they're not. The label "conspiracy theory" has become a cudgel to bash those who are skeptical or hold a differing point of view and even possibly used to divert attention or muddy waters so that genuine conspiracies can be enacted with relative impunity.

 

[Steve Dore]

Not always. Are you familiar with Graham Hancock?

The British journalist famous for pseudoscience?

 

[backtozero]

He is NOT a scientist.
Hancock's works propose a connection with a 'mother culture' from which he believes other ancient civilisations sprang.[4] An example of pseudohistory[5] and pseudoarchaeology, his work has neither been peer reviewed nor published in academic journals...LITERALLY THE REQUIREMENT.

I know he's not a scientist but his theories have merit and can be explained. Anyway, doesn't matter, I don't feel like getting into a thing with you guys.

 

[raman]

So it becomes a cyclical argument - science is ALWAYS right - until its not, and it's not when a consensus says its not...until it is. The frustration many free thinking individuals have is being told "you don't agree? you have a different point of view? You're skeptical? Shut-up, you're an idiot, the science is in, follow the science" (paraphrased). Similarly with conspiracy theories - they're always "crazy" until they're not. The label "conspiracy theory" has become a cudgel to bash those who are skeptical or hold a differing point of view and even possibly used to divert attention or muddy waters so that genuine conspiracies can be enacted with relative impunity.

Some terms you evidently misunderstand, based on the above:

"free thinking"
"skeptical"
"genuine"

 

[chiwigi]

I know he's not a scientist but his theories have merit and can be explained. Anyway, doesn't matter, I don't feel like getting into a thing with you guys.

No.

 

[raman]

Similarly with conspiracy theories - they're always "crazy" until they're not.

I'd like to know if you can provide an example of something that was widely labelled a conspiracy theory and then turned out to be true.

 

[Tredz]

Some terms you evidently misunderstand, based on the above:

"free thinking"
"skeptical"
"genuine"

Enlighten me

 

[Steve Dore]

I know he's not a scientist but his theories have merit and can be explained. ...

QAnon's theories have merit to and can be explained by tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Americans but that's not how science works.

 

[OneGreatClub]

This book really should be compulsory reading ...

 

[Steve Dore]

This book really should be compulsory readingView attachment 1078894...

As Mark Twain liked to quote, "There are three types of lies, lies, damned lies and statistics"

 

[backtozero]

QAnon's theories have merit to and can be explained by tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Americans but that's not how science works.

No they don't..

Completely different thing but you guys always go back to that subject and its really boring.

 

[Spadge]