Science is not a social construct. Science’s truths were true before there were societies; will still be true after all philosophers are dead; were true before any philosophers were born; were true before there were any minds, even trilobite or dinosaur minds, to notice them.
-
-
Too much of a stretch for me to make this interpretation, based on just the tweet. It *might* be the case that it refers to something else, but judging solely on what's on the tweet, I'm fine with it at face value (taking 'science' as meaning 'knowledge'). In any case:pic.twitter.com/3cnLk7v7OV
-
Anyone who's so loose with language conflating "science" with "knowledge," as Dawkins did (if you are correct), needs an education in the philosophy of science.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Disagree. I think you're reading his intentions wrong. "Science's truth"
-
Context matters. I'm simply interpreting in the context of his history over the last few years.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
That's a big assumption for such a strong criticism
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
This whole thing confuses me. As a lot of people are saying there's a difference between hard facts and things that are still being studied or that are not completely agreed on. That's how I read the original tweet, but it also seems like a lot of the objections to this tweet
-
are saying the same exact thing? Where's the disagreement here? Is it not reasonable to say that the current ongoing scientific studies are vulnerable to societal bias, just as they have always been in every civilisation that has ever existed? We're no different
End of conversation
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.

