I feel like a negative consequence of this extreme broadening of the definition of "science" is opening the door wide for pseudoscience I mean, just looking at the world and trying to find patterns in it isn't science, people do that all the time and come up with total bullshit https://twitter.com/ZachWeiner/status/1247860038913359874 …
-
-
Like, just coming up with rules and categories based on human experience is extremely common, often a lot of fun, and so easy it's often unconscious It's also not science, and in fact often the job of science is to oppose this In its most negative form this is what bigotry is
Show this thread -
I know the negative side of "science" is being a Debbie Downer/Neil DeGrasse Tyson, always debunking and disbelieving and being like "I don't know, there's no evidence" It's the whole thing the "I Fucking Love" kind of "science" is against But it's important
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
if science were so easy to do it would not have taken us thousands of years to invent it
-
if you look at science from a historical perspective, it's clear that the idea of rigorously stating a hypothesis, then checking it via repeated, controlled observation is not remotely a "natural" or "obvious" human activity
- Show replies
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.