I’m really sick of everybody misusing the word science.
-Science is not a consensus (looking at the Pluto vote here)
-Science is not theory creation (that’s literally the opposite. you’ll see why)
-Science is not probabilities (sorry quantum)
-Science is not even data observation (although this is a needed portion)
SCIEINCE is literally “knowledge” and specifically distinct from “belief”. This means science can never be achieved if there is any doubt. 99% sure is not science. It happened one time and I’m not sure if it will happen again: Not science. “In my scientific opinion”: not science.
-Science is only one thing: PROVING theories WRONG through experimentation. (And not some bogus paper theory so you have an easy win. A real theory that people really believe. I’m not sure if you caught that: science knocks down people’s beliefs. Science is the opposite of belief. Science is the opposite of how these people use it)
You're on the right track, but i think you definition is incomplete. I highly recommend Vox Day's breakdown of science into it's base components.
Scientody: the process (hypothesis, experiment, and replication)
Scientage: the knowledge base (the accumulation of previous scientific discovery)
Scientistry: the profession (the establishment that practices, both in academia and industry).
Current big S "Science" is the combination of all three. The knowledge base, assembled through the process, completed mostly by those in the profession.
Our current problem in the scientific community is a moral one; it does not work without actors working under clear moral guidelines. Ironically, I suspect the current reproduceability crisis and pervasive influence of money in science is a direct result of the secularization of the industry. Many of the great discoveries of history were produced by those trying to understand Gods truth.
"Secularization of the industry"? By definition, science is agnostic and demands rigorous evidence of positive claims. Religion is anti-science in the sense that it requires belief without evidence - euphemistically called "faith" in an attempt to sound virtuous. 93% of the National Academy of Science are atheists or agnostics for precisely this reason.
Many men smarter than us have had no problem holding faith in God while practicing science.
We have reached a point where reproduciblity is so bad a coin flip is often more reliable. The body of scientific knowledge has become corrupt due to the desire for status and money.
"93% of the National Academy of Science are atheists or agnostics for precisely this reason."
This is consensus, not science. Modern day "Science!" has become it's own religion...
I’m really sick of everybody misusing the word science.
-Science is not a consensus (looking at the Pluto vote here) -Science is not theory creation (that’s literally the opposite. you’ll see why) -Science is not probabilities (sorry quantum) -Science is not even data observation (although this is a needed portion)
SCIEINCE is literally “knowledge” and specifically distinct from “belief”. This means science can never be achieved if there is any doubt. 99% sure is not science. It happened one time and I’m not sure if it will happen again: Not science. “In my scientific opinion”: not science.
-Science is only one thing: PROVING theories WRONG through experimentation. (And not some bogus paper theory so you have an easy win. A real theory that people really believe. I’m not sure if you caught that: science knocks down people’s beliefs. Science is the opposite of belief. Science is the opposite of how these people use it)
You're on the right track, but i think you definition is incomplete. I highly recommend Vox Day's breakdown of science into it's base components.
Scientody: the process (hypothesis, experiment, and replication)
Scientage: the knowledge base (the accumulation of previous scientific discovery)
Scientistry: the profession (the establishment that practices, both in academia and industry).
Current big S "Science" is the combination of all three. The knowledge base, assembled through the process, completed mostly by those in the profession.
Our current problem in the scientific community is a moral one; it does not work without actors working under clear moral guidelines. Ironically, I suspect the current reproduceability crisis and pervasive influence of money in science is a direct result of the secularization of the industry. Many of the great discoveries of history were produced by those trying to understand Gods truth.
Edit: Formatting (still getting used to .winning)
"Secularization of the industry"? By definition, science is agnostic and demands rigorous evidence of positive claims. Religion is anti-science in the sense that it requires belief without evidence - euphemistically called "faith" in an attempt to sound virtuous. 93% of the National Academy of Science are atheists or agnostics for precisely this reason.
Many men smarter than us have had no problem holding faith in God while practicing science.
We have reached a point where reproduciblity is so bad a coin flip is often more reliable. The body of scientific knowledge has become corrupt due to the desire for status and money.
"93% of the National Academy of Science are atheists or agnostics for precisely this reason."
This is consensus, not science. Modern day "Science!" has become it's own religion...