Yes, we are in deep trouble indeed, but there is another problem, in my view, how our message would be read by some audiences: "science is wrong".
-
-
I think that one of the main messages we should convey is that the practice of science has little to do with mass-media, pop-science stars, controversy, public exposure and name shaming; >>
-
and that the methods of science do not clash with those of other rational sources of knowledge but rather are intimately linked.
-
Damn straight. Science is sexist, for example, but ideally shouldn't be.
-
Well... ppl who practice science are sexist!

-
Yes, and the science they produce is sexist too.
-
That's not science, they claim it is, which is not the same. It lacks understanding of other knowledge that should be taken into account and that is, deliberately or not, ignored! But I see your point.

-
I think it's tricky to say it's not science because most of science has been and is sexist, sadly.
-
I think we are talking about different aspects. If I am correct, you are referring to the "product" while I am referring to the "method". If I take your point of view, then I have to agree. Yes it is then extremely sexist!
- 2 more 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.