The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back • Hacker News Board

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#151

Post by 75dvtwin » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 8:16 PM UTC

I think to get science back to authority Simply 3 things need to happen

a) Academia must rid self of clandestine corporate sponsorship (so make it very transparent, or do not use it)

b) Academia must rid itself of 'Coins-for-grades' systems of grading academic progress of the students

c) Academia must rid itself of so-called-new humanities that are basically preparatory schools for political activists

It is also fairly exhausting to read these maniacal conjectures, as presented by Robert P. Crease in the article, linking US President Trump with various fringe movements.

It will not work, it will not change the public view of his achievements, successes and his progress on dismantling the corrupt, do-as-we-say-but-not-as-we-do conglomerates in business, education, politics and entertainment industries.

"... The same is true of the ebbing of scientific authority, seen in everything from denialism over vaccine utility to the ambivalence in US President Donald Trump’s administration over the Iran nuclear deal, hammered out by scientists. .."

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#152

Post by unknownkadath » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 8:17 PM UTC

identity-haver wrote: post #143

unknownkadath wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you? Did you read the article? What in god's name is phd514 arguing with? No where in the damn fine article is the phrase "books of nature" mentioned. The article is describing the context in which modern scientific thought gained currency among the educated and the powerful, both in 17th century Europe and the 19th century Ottoman Empire, how that authority waned in the mid-20th century and today, and how we ca…

It's not at all clear that the books contain "geometry" per se in the painting. I can't find a source either way but if you've ever seen alchemical or astrological figures they could be mistaken for math. The people were destroying their own books after hearing a new way of looking at the world. How different is this from some kid throwing away his Joel Osteen book after taking a philosophy class? But I agree that th…

That wasn't phd514's point at all. It's clear he didn't bother to read the article. (lol, look at me, I'm upset people didn't read the article before commenting. I'm turning into such an old fart. Maybe I should load up my newsreader and post about cats. Also, you should look up what Pythagoras believed. Whew!)

Now, if you're making an entirely separate argument that the author went out of his way hurt people's feelings and "provoke conflict," that's another story.

I don't think that's the case, but maybe I've got a tin ear for that sort of thing these days. I'm not persuaded.

Let's say that, hey, maybe he did. My response is, "So, what?"

The target audience for this article or this book isn't the sort of person who is going to get their feelings hurt by suggesting that the St. Paul depicted in the painting (which had its own context, the 17th century European context, which is the context described by the article). The target audience of this book is the set of people who commonly think, "Gee, I wish I could convince lots more folks that global warming is real before large swaths of the world become uninhabitable by multi-cellular animal life."

Frankly, the kind of person who would let this up their nose is probably not going to be persuaded by anything we have to say, anyway.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#153

Post by orblivion » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 8:23 PM UTC

orblivion wrote: post #69

I think the whole idea of scientific authority is troubling. Of course (as another poster pointed out) we should all be convinced of the value of the scientific method in school. It doesn't require evidence. Believing the scientific establishment, however, is an epistemic challenge. The way I think of it, for us to believe physicists to the extent it affects us is easy. We just buy gadgets, and they seem to work. We…

(oops, this was actually supposed to be in reply to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19421709)

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#154

Post by opportune » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 8:24 PM UTC

metalchianti wrote: post #44

ummonk wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, the people who proclaim this are generally not talking about the scientific method, but about specific theories. Generally evolution and climate change (and the safety of vaccination is becoming an issue as well). It's amazing for example how many of these people will turn around and believe hormone-replacement therapy creates a level playing field in sports between trans-women and cis-women.

I agree. Believing in science seems to imply "dogmatism for the 4 or 5 highly politicized scientific talking points in the mainstream narrative."

I don't see that as a bad thing. With religion, upwards of 90% of people don't really know shit about actual theology or anything of that nature (i.e. the reasoning behind beliefs). They just know some basic beliefs about their sect because their pastor told them so and their parents probably believing the same thing.

Similarly, wre can't really expect everyone to know or care why evolution/heliocentrism is a settled topic but it's really helpful for them to trust the scientific process regardless.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#155

Post by yters » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 8:26 PM UTC

Barrin92 wrote: post #147

charliesharding wrote: post #5

The way in which public considers science today is much more analogous to the way the public considered religion during the time of Galileo. Think of the way people are castigated for not believing in scientific "truths". I see signs in peoples yard saying that "in this house, we believe science is real". As someone who has studied biochemistry for years, this kind of reverence for science is truly troubling. The one…

>in this house, we believe science is real Or maybe those people, even if they don't have much of a grasp on the scientific method, see the material progress and results of scientific work and conclude that they're going to place trust in scientific authority? This is an entirely false equivalence. One can trust scientists even without understanding science, on the fact alone that research produces results that every…

Isn't trusting authority contrary to trusting science? The point of science is that we can verify truths for ourselves without relying on authority.

Hence, if any authority, 'scientific' or otherwise, asserts their authority instead of providing individually verifiable evidence of its claims, then we can say they are being unscientific, regardless of title.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#156

Post by mcguire » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 8:28 PM UTC

"The imperial powers, especially after Sultan Abdülmecid I (1823–61), saw the cause as a lack of Western-style science. Yet could they import it, and still be faithful Muslims and patriotic citizens? The debate took place at all levels of Ottoman society, from government to popular culture, in novels, plays and even cartoons. When Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, founder and first president of the Turkish Republic, declared in 1924 that “the truest guide is knowledge and science”, it was the outcome of an extensive self-examination that amounted to a large-scale humanities education. The debate turned on who the Ottoman people thought they were, and who they wanted to become. The authority of science rested on people, not on tools or methods or charts and data."

And yet, is not Turkey still struggling with that same question, 100 years later?

"[Authority], [Hannah Arendt] thought, is neither innate nor automatic, and facts alone don’t have it. It is possible only thanks to institutions that create what she called public space. Without that, it is possible for people who are not personally accomplished, who pontificate in recycled stock phrases, who polarize situations and who are insatiable braggarts coveting media coverage, to acquire power and influence."

And how often have proponents of science been guilty of those same actions?

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#157

Post by yters » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 8:28 PM UTC

hashmap wrote: post #128

charliesharding wrote: post #5

The way in which public considers science today is much more analogous to the way the public considered religion during the time of Galileo. Think of the way people are castigated for not believing in scientific "truths". I see signs in peoples yard saying that "in this house, we believe science is real". As someone who has studied biochemistry for years, this kind of reverence for science is truly troubling. The one…

Comparing book burning, jailing, and being murdered to getting made fun of on internet dot com is just not compelling. The whole "but science is just as bad as religion" argument rings quite hollow.

"Scientific authority" is the source of the genocides of the 20th century, mass sterilization, what we now consider crackpot science, and many social ills. I would say it is actually worse than the religious authority of the past.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#158

Post by identity-haver » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 8:29 PM UTC

unknownkadath wrote: post #152

identity-haver wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not at all clear that the books contain "geometry" per se in the painting. I can't find a source either way but if you've ever seen alchemical or astrological figures they could be mistaken for math. The people were destroying their own books after hearing a new way of looking at the world. How different is this from some kid throwing away his Joel Osteen book after taking a philosophy class? But I agree that th…

That wasn't phd514's point at all. It's clear he didn't bother to read the article. (lol, look at me, I'm upset people didn't read the article before commenting. I'm turning into such an old fart. Maybe I should load up my newsreader and post about cats. Also, you should look up what Pythagoras believed. Whew!) Now, if you're making an entirely separate argument that the author went out of his way hurt people's feeli…

It matters because there is a large overlap between the people who need to pay more attention to science and religious people (by both his and my estimate). So needlessly dragging a religious figure completely works against what he's trying to accomplish.

He brings up Ataturk; imagine how Ataturk's modernization plan would have worked if he went out of his way to rail against the prophet Mohammed's perceived science denial.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#159

Post by maire » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 8:29 PM UTC

stdbrouw wrote: post #76

Erlich_Bachman wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A dogmatic belief in anything is detrimental. It takes wisdom to understand this. Many followers of science lack this. Scientific method is a great tool - for the type of questions that it is designed to deal with - and a disaster waiting to happen if used for other areas of inquiry.

> Scientific method is a great tool - for the type of questions that it is designed to deal with - and a disaster waiting to happen if used for other areas of inquiry. What other areas of inquiry would that be?

A really good book to read on this is "the Signal and the Noise" by Nate Silver. Basically, the scientific method requires modeling the system correctly which only works for certain kinds of systems. Systems where the complexity exceeds the available data causes people to see patterns where they don't exist and to be overly confident in their interpretation of the data.

The entire area of nutrition and weight management is a joke. Medicine is problematic and Psychology is questionable.

Another problem is that the popular media publishes inconclusive studies because they are click bait. People read them because they are interested in living longer and losing weight and being happy.

Fear also turns studies into clickbait. The latest was the blizzard of articles on if bugs are dying off or not.

Then there is the fact that negative studies tend to be ignored and when the study failed or it introduces data that does not conform to general knowledge.

All this makes people question studies where the data is conclusive.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#160

Post by unknownkadath » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 8:29 PM UTC

mcguire wrote: post #156

" The imperial powers, especially after Sultan Abdülmecid I (1823–61), saw the cause as a lack of Western-style science. Yet could they import it, and still be faithful Muslims and patriotic citizens? The debate took place at all levels of Ottoman society, from government to popular culture, in novels, plays and even cartoons. When Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, founder and first president of the Turkish Republic, declared i…

I dunno, whatabout you tell me?