(January 16, 2022 at 10:02 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: As Steven Novella said "There's nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. Which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?"
Dot points:
People, namely scientists, conduct science. Science does not conduct itself.
Scientists, being people, can sometimes fail at using logic properly to evaluate results. They can also end up doing very shoddy research.
Subjectivity plays an inevitable role when interpreting results and determining conclusions. And as such, biases are at play as well.
Politics itself is certainly at play when it comes to conducting science (e.g., grant providers funding only selective topics for research depending on certain ideological views).
Science has known limitations.
Your view of science (and Steven's view of science) sounds quite ideological to me.
