“Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

Post by dqpb » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 6:57 PM UTC

cycomanic wrote: post #117

NotYourLawyer wrote: post #20

No, science must pursue the truth, no matter where it leads. There is no such thing as a hate fact.

I think there is a lot more nuance than people admit. Lets take an example of we have a deadly disease spreading through the population (much more deadly than covid) . Let's say a scientist finds out that the disease is primarily (exclusively) spread by red haired people. Should they just publish the finding? The fact becoming openly known might lead to mobs of people chasing red hairs and locking them up or even lyn…

Post by throwawayacc2 » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 7:03 PM UTC

dcow wrote: post #159

remram wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see any evidence that it was "axed", it is not getting that many upvotes and is falling to later pages.

It was top 5 or 10 or so on the front page and then after a page refresh gone. It has more votes than many of the topics on the front page and discussion is active. Maybe just really unlucky timing on my part but not the normal progression you see. I know these type topics are typically removed from the spotlight by staff out of a presumption that the comments won’t be productive. I think that’s fair in some cases, b…

Post by nradov » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 7:04 PM UTC

UnpossibleJim wrote: post #119

rrauenza wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

David Shor was ostracized for presenting this research: https://www.vox.com/2020/7/29/21340308/david-shor-omar-wasow... > Shor, citing research by Princeton political scientist Omar Wasow, suggested that these incidents could prompt a political backlash that would help President Donald Trump’s bid for reelection. At the same time, he noted that, historically, nonviolent protests had been effective at driving politica…

If people are truly worried about electing people like Donald Trump they'll broaden education and, in particular, education in the hard sciences like maths and computer science to bolster critical thinking and logic. At that point we won't elect reality show hucksters who blatantly lie and foment sedition.

Post by dcow » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 7:05 PM UTC

throwawayacc2 wrote: post #109

mizzack wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And many many people will be fooled. At least you can spot the acolytes with "I believe in Science" bumper stickers and yard signs. Science is not a belief system.

No, but the trappings of science have been used to dress the new religion of the west. Same old shit, we just don’t call it god now, we call it “the science”. We are romans in the early 5th century. What’s coming won’t be pretty.

Post by throwawayacc2 » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 7:09 PM UTC

goethes_kind wrote: post #157

i_love_limes wrote: post #112

This has garnered quite a lot of reactions from the comments. I'd like to ask a genuine question about this, from the perspective of assuming that Nature is acting in good faith about this. Let's say someone has calculated the polygenic scores (PGS) of Heteronormativity, meaning that a model, can predict with a decent level of accuracy that someone will or will not be straight from their DNA. This, in an ideal world,…

I never understood this perspective, that aborting fetuses whose prospects are guaranteed to be worse, is somehow wrong or even oppression, and somehow oppression of a whole group of other people completely unrelated to the family. If me and my wife are planning a baby, that's between us. There is no outside group that has a say or is somehow being oppressed when we decide that we do not want a child who is going to…