Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) • Hacker News Board

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#171

Post by watwut » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:18 PM UTC

TeaDrunk wrote: post #114

nradov wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it disappointing to see so many Americans panicking over the disease when medical science tells us the infection fatality rate is likely under 0.35%. https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-... Our current pandemic response is mostly a faith-based policy based on irrational fears rather than a science-based policy based on objective reality.

Under 0.35% which is several times greater than the next comparable (the flu), and greater for more than 30% of the population due to age and pre-existing condition. Very few people dont have a personal stake in keeping the people they love alive (parents, spouses, children, siblings, friends, lovers, etc.) The panic makes more sense if you consider the overwhelming majority of people are looking not just at their ow…

The "panic" framing is manipulative itself. It is an attempt to stigmatize people who consider the disease to be serious issue as emotional and scared as opposed to arguing with them.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#172

Post by kickopotomus » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:19 PM UTC

merpnderp wrote: post #73

xvilka wrote: post #18

> There's always the risk that the West might internally reject the scientific revolution This risk is real. Just see how many American citizens rejecting medical science in times of pandemic.

But was it medical science when the CDC advised people, very strongly, to not wear masks or that the virus coming out of Wuhan was of no concern to everyday Americans? How are people supposed to believe in capital 'S' science when our scientific institutions make claims based on their guts instead of just admitting they don't know (which is the only acceptable scientific answer when you can't back up a claim with rep…

I think this, again, stems from a general misunderstanding of what science is. Science is a method of drawing conclusions about data. Sometimes, those initial conclusions can be misguided by incomplete data. The world discovered this virus less than a year ago. It takes some time to determine the different transmission vectors and risk factors associated with each. The CDC did not make a claim based on their "guts". The initial stance on masks was determined for a few reasons:

1) People often don't use masks properly. They often touch their masks and their faces. The initial thinking was that the virus spread largely through touching contaminated surfaces.

2) Mask mandates are difficult (as we are seeing now) and significant portions of the population refusing to use masks undercuts their efficacy.

3) There was a shortage of PPE when the pandemic started. The CDC and NHS didn't want to find themselves in a situation where hospitals had a hard time procuring masks because scared citizens hoarded the supply.

The anti-science issue in the US appears to have a few prongs to it. There has been a growing distrust of science for quite some time with the anti-vax and flat earth movements. I'm not sure what caused it, but it sadly appears to be a growing trend. Also, as we are seeing with the Coronavirus response, a lot of people seem to misunderstand that scientific consensus can change as new data is collected.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#173

Post by hannofcart » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:21 PM UTC

Sporktacular wrote: post #85

Hard to put my finger on why this feels off. The title 'Arabic World' is strange, it's usually the "Arab world" unless they're referring to the regions where Arabic is spoken. It then gives statistics for Iran and Turkey, neither of which are significantly Arabic speaking countries, by which point you realise they're conflating ethnic-linguistic groups with the most region's most popular religion. So by the time it's…

The article elaborates on that choice of words.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#174

Post by watwut » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:21 PM UTC

DSingularity wrote: post #130

mrwnmonm wrote: post #62

I am an Arab and I am pretty sure the article is full of misinformation before even reading it, but will read it anyway. Take the first paragraph > Contemporary Islam is not known for its engagement in the modern scientific project. But it is heir to a legendary “Golden Age” of Arabic science frequently invoked by commentators hoping to make Muslims and Westerners more respectful and understanding of each other. Pres…

Even in the comments here people will bring up countries like japan as a contrast. Why did the Japanese, unlike the Arabs, rise again after their fall? Could the centuries of direct colonial rule by the Ottomans and Europeans played a role? The Ottomans were by no measure gentle but the Europeans were nothing short of barbaric. Take Palestine. To solidify their hold the British simply rounded up and executed fighting…

Japan had democracy imposed on them and so did Germany, both had them imposed by winning forces. The comment you are responding to complains about demoracy in Arab world being subverted by west.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#175

Post by tgv » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:22 PM UTC

feralimal wrote: post #34

Ha ha - primitive Islamic religionists!! Only we are exactly the same, but are blind to our failings. This narrative plays on our conceited, flabby, unreasoned thinking. But its nice to laugh to others, eh? Science to me, is the application of the scientific method. This is to say that whatever is being looked at should be repeatable, and consistently provide the same results. Strictly speaking, when we say we know,…

As far as viruses are concerned: when washing your hands can keep diseases at bay, that's good enough for me.

Then you study DNA at school, you experiment a bit with drosophila, you read about Mendel and evolution, and it makes sense, doesn't it? It isn't faith, it well calculated trust.

> Science is absolutely equivalent to religion

And that's why we see people smitten by lightning every day.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#176

Post by fimbulvetr » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:24 PM UTC

paganel wrote: post #118

nradov wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it disappointing to see so many Americans panicking over the disease when medical science tells us the infection fatality rate is likely under 0.35%. https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-... Our current pandemic response is mostly a faith-based policy based on irrational fears rather than a science-based policy based on objective reality.

Not sure about the United States but in my parts of the world (Eastern Europe) it has also transformed into a social- and political-differentiating issue, i.e. people of a certain social status and of certain political views tend to over-emphasise the seriousness of the virus and to paint the other side in all sorts of unflattering colours because, supposedly, this latter side doesn't take the virus as serious as the…

There may be some facts we don't know yet. The economist has done some research that suggests that the number of deaths have been significantly under-reported.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/07/15/tracking...

Personally, I am refraining from adopting a position as it make take years to have a better idea of what the fatality rate is.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#177

Post by eternalban » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:24 PM UTC

Science flourished in Muslim lands until the devastating invasion of Mongols effectively destroyed the social and political networks that supported the “Golden Age”. Many families dedicated to learning migrated ahead of the Golden Horde to western parts of Muslim lands. The mystic poet Rumi is a famous example, and even got his name “Rumi” because his family migrated from Khurasan to Anatolia.

Based on that background, we know that the cause of the famous decline has little to do with religious doctrine. The Golden Horde of Mongols destroyed the Golden Age of Muslims. Simple enough.

West should count its lucky stars that Muslims took the brunt of the Mongol destruction.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#178

Post by sasaf5 » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:25 PM UTC

Undoing the clickbait:

After many paragraphs telling that the reason is not simple, it finally centers in occasionalism.

> At the heart of Ash’ari metaphysics is the idea of occasionalism, a doctrine that denies natural causality. Put simply, it suggests natural necessity cannot exist because God’s will is completely free. Ash’arites believed that God is the only cause, so that the world is a series of discrete physical events each willed by God.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#179

Post by bg117 » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:27 PM UTC

If not for the invasion by outside forces like (Turks/Mongols) from around 11th century in present day India, the scientific culture would not have been broken. Invaders destroyed Nalanda university in present day Bihar during one such invasion. Destroying knowledge is the goto activity by invaders and this continues to this day under ISIS also.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#180

Post by read_if_gay_ » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:27 PM UTC

helen___keller wrote: post #142

merpnderp wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But was it medical science when the CDC advised people, very strongly, to not wear masks or that the virus coming out of Wuhan was of no concern to everyday Americans? How are people supposed to believe in capital 'S' science when our scientific institutions make claims based on their guts instead of just admitting they don't know (which is the only acceptable scientific answer when you can't back up a claim with rep…

Serious question, why should we be so concerned that they were wrong the first time? You say > admitting they don't know (which is the only acceptable scientific answer when you can't back up a claim with reproducible experiments). But what kind of response is that really, when there's an infectious disease and the center for disease control tells the public "We have no clue what the appropriate response is, we're go…

> On the contrary, the ONLY ethical way for the CDC to act in the face of an emerging (potential) crisis is recommendations based on the current beliefs of the organization

This is debatable, but in any case, is it excusable for the CDC to hold beliefs that are so badly wrong in the first place? Especially in the face of evidence from the rest of the world?