Want to critique power structures? You aren't doing science. You can't even be seeking truth. No agenda with "criticize" in it can be truthseeking; only curious and neutral inquiry into whatever might be happening. "Criticize" puts some results more on the agenda than others.
-
-
My knowledge of Galileo's motives is quite limited, but I'm not aware of any "I'm going to search for evidence that will support my anti-Catholic advocacy" goals. He just described what he found, which threatened Church because of THEIR advocacy goals.
-
But then what happened? His "description" of his "findings" would have been forgotten if the existing power structures had remained unchallenged by evidence gathered by his scientific method.
-
It's irrelevant whether we remember his story or not. Others were going to find the same thing, repeatedly and repeatably. Real science is like that. Who found it first and what the Church's reaction was is an interesting chapter in history but irrelevant to the actual science.
-
Eliezar clearly understands that real science, unlike politics and other religions (theistic or non-theistic) that try to pose as science to appear more credible, is about looking for what patterns actually exist, not looking for support for a pre-determined cause.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.