Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 5:56 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What are Laws of Nature?
#21
RE: What are Laws of Nature?
(March 21, 2022 at 12:53 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:
(March 21, 2022 at 9:01 am)Istvan Wrote: I'd take that bet.

You count how many times people in these kinds of discussions chant slogans like Science is true no matter what you believe, use the term "science" as if it's synonymous with "reality," and declare that anyone who doubts that our scientific knowledge corresponds to the nature of the physical universe is some kind of lunatic.

And I'll count how many times people say that science is a human construct with all the biases and cultural influences that entails, admit that scientific progress is inextricably linked to war, politics and business, and that our knowledge is merely imposing order on the chaos of phenomena to make it comprehensible to humans.

You really think there's a question as to whose bucket fills up first?

Slogans are a short and striking memorable phrase, usually used in advertising. I don't think you'll find many people here who think they're statements of 100% accuracy. I think it's highly questionable whose bucket will fill up first here if the choices are

'Science is true no matter what you believe'

and

'Science is a human construct with all the biases and cultural influences that entails'

actually, at a fundamental level, the two are not mutually exclusive.   They can both be true.   In fact it is unlikely for it to be otherwise in any practical system.

material facts are not any less factual if the process whereby the facts are determined meandered through biases and cultural influences.    

It would be insipid to posit that demonstrability of the resulting facts should be weighed more lightly if cultural biase can be identified in the process of their determination.
Reply
#22
RE: What are Laws of Nature?
(March 21, 2022 at 1:10 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: material facts are not any less factual if the process whereby the facts are determined meandered through biases and cultural influences.    

It would be insipid to posit that demonstrability of the resulting facts should be weighed more lightly if cultural biase can be identified in the process of their determination.
Really? If the methods of producing the information were riddled with bias and exclusionary practices, that's exactly what would make me question the reliability and objectivity of the information produced.
Reply
#23
RE: What are Laws of Nature?
(March 21, 2022 at 1:46 pm)Istvan Wrote: Really? If the methods of producing the information were riddled with bias and exclusionary practices, that's exactly what would make me question the reliability and objectivity of the information produced.

Reality is independent of biases.  Where bias can produce scientific mistakes, mistakes are part of science, and are self-correcting.

One person's paper isn't "science", or we would all be taking Ivermectin for COVID.

In physics, bias plays a very tiny role. In softer sciences, it plays a much bigger one, because data that would falsify bad science can be harder to come by or agree on.
Reply
#24
RE: What are Laws of Nature?
(March 21, 2022 at 1:46 pm)Istvan Wrote:
(March 21, 2022 at 1:10 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: material facts are not any less factual if the process whereby the facts are determined meandered through biases and cultural influences.    

It would be insipid to posit that demonstrability of the resulting facts should be weighed more lightly if cultural biase can be identified in the process of their determination.
Really? If the methods of producing the information were riddled with bias and exclusionary practices, that's exactly what would make me question the reliability and objectivity of the information produced.

that’s why we test things, and don’t just assert things based on what we think are powerful logic.
Reply
#25
RE: What are Laws of Nature?
(March 21, 2022 at 1:59 pm)HappySkeptic Wrote:
(March 21, 2022 at 1:46 pm)Istvan Wrote: Really? If the methods of producing the information were riddled with bias and exclusionary practices, that's exactly what would make me question the reliability and objectivity of the information produced.

Reality is independent of biases.  Where bias can produce scientific mistakes, mistakes are part of science, and are self-correcting.

One person's paper isn't "science", or we would all be taking Ivermectin for COVID.

In physics, bias plays a very tiny role.  In softer sciences, it plays a much bigger one, because data that would falsify bad science can be harder to come by or agree on.
As I said, it's wrong to make scientific inquiry synonymous with "reality." We're talking about scientific fields, in which women still face bias and exclusion on many levels. I have no reason to believe that this won't distort the reliability of the results, and every reason to believe that your belief in the "self-correcting" nature of scientific endeavor is a bit optimistic.

(March 21, 2022 at 2:35 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote:
(March 21, 2022 at 1:46 pm)Istvan Wrote: Really? If the methods of producing the information were riddled with bias and exclusionary practices, that's exactly what would make me question the reliability and objectivity of the information produced.

that’s why we test things, and don’t just assert things based on what we think are powerful logic.
okay, but you don't think that who is allowed to perform the testing, and who is excluded from the process, makes any difference whatsoever to the reliability of the results?
Reply
#26
RE: What are Laws of Nature?
(March 21, 2022 at 3:06 pm)Istvan Wrote: As I said, it's wrong to make scientific inquiry synonymous with "reality." We're talking about scientific fields, in which women still face bias and exclusion on many levels. I have no reason to believe that this won't distort the reliability of the results, and every reason to believe that your belief in the "self-correcting" nature of scientific endeavor is a bit optimistic.

Are you saying that because there are fewer women physicists, that physics has gender-biased errors that can never self-correct (I guess because men can't correct them)?
Reply
#27
RE: What are Laws of Nature?
(March 21, 2022 at 9:01 am)Istvan Wrote:
(March 21, 2022 at 7:15 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: I doubt that a poll here would bear that one out
I'd take that bet.

You count how many times people in these kinds of discussions chant slogans like Science is true no matter what you believe, use the term "science" as if it's synonymous with "reality," and declare that anyone who doubts that our scientific knowledge corresponds to the nature of the physical universe is some kind of lunatic.

And I'll count how many times people say that science is a human construct with all the biases and cultural influences that entails, admit that scientific progress is inextricably linked to war, politics and business, and that our knowledge is merely imposing order on the chaos of phenomena to make it comprehensible to humans.

You really think there's a question as to whose bucket fills up first?

I think it's the issue described directly after the quoted comment -

Quote:IDK, I doubt that a poll here would bear that one out - though it may be true somewhere of someone. I suspect it's more the case that you believe something other people hold (to) amounts to such a thing, regardless of whether they'd see it as such or agree even in principle.

In fairness, it was a pretty safe bet - as this forum isn't exactly chock full of people who believe in god-anythings, views or otherwise. Frankly, it's mathematically impossible for the gods eye view bucket to fill up faster in this demo, than in the god believing demo.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#28
RE: What are Laws of Nature?
(Deleted duplicate post.)
Reply
#29
RE: What are Laws of Nature?
(March 21, 2022 at 3:14 pm)HappySkeptic Wrote:
(March 21, 2022 at 3:06 pm)Istvan Wrote: As I said, it's wrong to make scientific inquiry synonymous with "reality." We're talking about scientific fields, in which women still face bias and exclusion on many levels. I have no reason to believe that this won't distort the reliability of the results, and every reason to believe that your belief in the "self-correcting" nature of scientific endeavor is a bit optimistic.

Are you saying that because there are fewer women physicists, that physics has gender-biased errors?
Well, do you think that making physics a boys' club is a recipe for diversity of opinion? Or is it bound to create an environment of groupthink and dick swinging?

A friend of the family is a biologist whose theory about tadpoles being able to hatch in response to environmental pressures was initially ridiculed by the men in the field. Her determination in setting up elaborate experiments and gathering evidence finally vindicated her, but how much research hasn't been performed because of the condescension of the male establishment in various disciplines? 

Different people, Prof. Warkentin likes to say, ask different questions.

Escape hatching in red-eyed tree frogs
Reply
#30
RE: What are Laws of Nature?
Just imagine how much philosophy hasn't been done™ for that same reason. Broadly true in any context at present, really. Yet one more reason that science isn't a gods eye view of anything. It's not even a man and woman's eye view of the same things.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The laws of thermodynamics LinuxGal 10 1539 November 25, 2022 at 8:12 pm
Last Post: brewer
  T-violation and conservation laws cosmology 0 499 December 29, 2017 at 12:40 am
Last Post: cosmology
  Does Physics now have a complete description of Nature? Jehanne 32 4361 April 10, 2017 at 11:14 am
Last Post: dyresand
  Possible 5th force of nature? Kosh 3 937 August 19, 2016 at 8:18 pm
Last Post: vorlon13
  Nature of Energy Panatheist 36 5665 March 17, 2016 at 2:45 am
Last Post: Panatheist
  Scientists Claim Laws Of Physics Change Throughout The Universe solja247 21 7900 September 24, 2010 at 10:52 am
Last Post: Jaysyn



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)