-
Hey there Guest!
If you enjoy BCF and find our forum a useful resource, if you appreciate not having ads pop up all over the place and you want to ensure we can stay online - Please consider supporting with an "optional" low-cost annual subscription.**Upgrade Now**
(PS: Subscribers don't see this UGLY banner)
Hey - did you know if you click on the title of a thread it will take you to the first unread post since you last visited that thread?
but were afraid to ask: 
STOP!! Never post your email address in open forums. Bots can "harvest" your email! If you must share your email use a Private Message or use the 
smilie in place of the real @
Pretty Please - add it to our Events forum(s) and add to the calendar! >> 
A New Constant
- Thread starter DNK
- Start date
Share this page
Offline
Tom, I think the idea behind the TedTalk is that too many people put faith in science like it is some sort of religion. I liked the way he uses the scientific method to question blind devotion to scientific theories that sometimes have not even been proven.
Doc, I think that is best constant for weight I have ever heard. I want to weigh everything in "Turtles" now.
Doc, I think that is best constant for weight I have ever heard. I want to weigh everything in "Turtles" now.
Offline
As I work with churches and try to help them understand the different world we live in, we talk about the "good" of the enlightenment - scientific method/ life saving drugs etc. but, also the cost - "If science is "TRUTH" then faith must be opinion or even sillyness. Partly because one important reality of all of this is education which allows people to make up their own minds and discover their own "truth." Interestingly we now see Science also being accused of being "opinion" as well notably in the anti-vaxxer movement and around climate change.
Recently read this:
"The crisis of trust in the media is part of a much broader crisis: a crisis of trust in knowledge, in facts, in experts and expertise; a hostility, amongst a certain section of the population, to anyone who knows anything about anything. It is, as some have called it, an "epistemic crisis"; a significant section of the population has simply decided it
knows what it knows, unreachable by any amount of evidence." (Andrew Coyne. Journalist - Innis College lecture)
Offline
With Lazarus, and going back through the earlier tales it's not that Long a stretch. :wink:
Offline
Perhaps looking at science and faith as the how and why, both could be a part of the same truth without conflict?
Offline
Bingo!
(Us humans are too easily swayed by the black/white yes/no true/false dichotomies.)
Offline
I've noticed that over the past decade as our society has tended to politicize everything in our lives that it has led to certain theories being promoted as fact and opinions given as facts.
Offline
Walter - an interesting point indeed. I wonder if the 24/7 two-way instant personal communications we've developed over the last 20 years or so has led to the "polarization" problem.
T.
Offline
Tom - I think that it has. My original post turned into a rant against social media and the echo chamber that Facebook and similar platforms turn into. If the only opinions you ever hear are your own then sooner or later you will start believing that you are right in all things. As this happens normal discourse breaks down and instead of true debates people turn to many different fallacies to attack those that they see as being wrong, i.e. anyone who disagrees with them on anything.
Offline
Well, science has to rely on empirical truths. Provable by other, separate experiments set up by different labs or parties. Theory is tested by experiments, whether corroborating or disproven. Belief has a completely different set of standards, much less dependent on any proof of validity. We've been slow to get proof of the things going on in the subatomic realm, but as time moves on (sic) we're learning. We've been moving down into th' pidd'ly bits further and further, the knowledge has been enhanced as a result.
Belief is still just that.
Belief is still just that.
Offline
And consensus is not science either.
Offline
Usually called: "mob rule" in my humble experience.
Offline
Credo, ergo sum.
You heard (read) it here first, folks!
You heard (read) it here first, folks!
Offline
The "Scientific Method" is basically, make an educated assumption then try many experiments to prove the assumption (or theory) was wrong. As Einstein said regarding his special theory or relativity, "No amount of experimenting can prove me right but a single experiment can prove me wrong."
Offline
A friendly reminder - be careful what links you click on here. If a link is posted by someone you don't know, or the URL looks fishy, DON'T CLICK. Spammers sometimes post links that lead to sites that can infect your computer, so be mindful what you click.