Mason  🏃‍♂️ ✂️

But, if you -> can't go any deeper than that, you're just chanting doctrine. <-

Isn't reaching consensus and pushing that knowledge out to the general population sort of the point? Not everyone can go deeper but they can still benefit from truths that others have labored deeper on.

The point is to understand how the consensus came to be, before telling it to others.

Is there a consensus that the earth is round? Or are we arguing for a flat earth?

Do you actually believe that it's irrelevant how the consensus around a spherical Earth came to be accepted, or are you just trolling? Serious question

I’m actually skeptical of the “cholesterol consensus”, as an example. It just seems people are throwing out all science nowadays, and using “skepticism” as an excuse

Is it not the case, then, that you can evaluate the means by which a consensus was reached on the shape of our planet and the means by which consensus was reached on various nutritional claims, and conclude — accepting fallibility, ofc — that one is stronger than the other?

I think we both agree that we should question consensus and appeals to authority. Sadly it seems that choosing what to question will always be guided by our beliefs and prejudices, lower down the stack so to speak. And so it leads to more division. We are still just apes.