[deleted]
“Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”
451–460 of 883 posts
Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”
#452Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What happens when we stop agreeing on what the “good” is? Did we ever agree? I always felt like Democracy is some kind of status quo between the incompatible.
No, there is no universal "good" otherwise wars would not occur. The American Civil War and WW2 are pretty classical examples of massive disagreements over the legitimacy of certain classes of humans. Had those wars not ended the way they did, black people would still be property, and Jews, Romani, and LGBT people would have been exterminated. There are still people who wish that we lived in that alternative history.…
> black people would still be property
Not likely. Slavery had already disappeared in the Northern states due to its inefficiency and internal contradictions. Secession was an attempt to prop up slavery by isolating it economically. It was never going to work.
Slavery as an institution disappeared in other countries around the same time.
It was free markets that destroyed slavery, as slavery simply could not compete with free labor, and slavery was incompatible with industrialization.
In the South, by 1860, the only industry where slavery was still profitable was cotton, and that was coming unglued.
Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”
#453I'm pro trans rights, pro LGBTQ, and also very much value free speech. There is a trend on the political left right now that basically equates speech directly with violence (e.g. asking whether a man is capable of getting pregnant is violence) >Academic content that undermines the dignity or rights of specific groups >We commit to using this guidance cautiously and judiciously, consulting with ethics experts and advo…
I see it more as an acknowledgement that, in the midst of a propaganda war (which the entire world is now engaged in 24/7, thanks to the internet), the information you put out into the world may have strategic value to individuals or groups whose goals are contrary to the good of the human race. When true things are used to justify horrific actions, it's particularly difficult to prevent because that truth lends seri…
Which human race?
The Spanish conquest of the Aztecs was both a genocide against the Aztecs and a war of liberation by every other tribe which was used as human cattle for sacrifices by the Aztecs.
Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”
#454Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a person of faith. At the same time, we point out that the religion of "scientism" exists whether people admit it or not, especially when they claim that they "believe in science". Correct faith and science are not contradictory. And those people mix up belief in the unseen with blind faith without proof or evidence.
I think your view on this is being influenced by the limitations of the language you're using. When a religious person says they "believe" something, it means they operate as if it were true even though they have no evidence to indicate it as such (a.k.a. the god of the gaps). When a scientist says they "believe" something, it means all evidence gathered so far indicates that it is true, but if more data comes in and…
> When a religious person says they "believe" something, it means they operate as if it were true even though they have no evidence to indicate it as such (a.k.a. the god of the gaps).
That is not true. As I pointed out, belief in the unseen, with evidence, is very different from believing without evidence.
Check out this lecture for a more detailed and nuanced explanation[1]. It details some of the inherent limitations of science.
Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”
#455Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because that prayer lead to a miracle in the past, doesn't mean you can demand that God grants the same miracle again in different circumstances. That's trying to treat God as something like an appliance rather than an agent, and even an appliance would have instructions for when it would work. If I may reverse the burden of proof, and be equally unreasonable, let me say that if you think that there is no afterl…
>Just because that prayer lead to a miracle in the past, doesn't mean you can demand that God grants the same miracle again in different circumstances. Why not? If a god has shown that they can intervene in the physical world we live in, why shouldn't we be able to test that?
God does not obey your or anyone else's whim. The Quran says:
> He cannot be questioned about what He does, but they will ˹all˺ be questioned.
I posted this lecture in another post, it's a good starting point: https://youtu.be/If3cNUixEBM
Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”
#456Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, this is completely off topic. Why aren't you using capital letters? I've seen this trend starting to gain more traction and it makes no sense to me.
The textual medium of the internet has allowed for the creation of differing written registers. You may have learned to write in a "standard way" in school that implicitly established itself as "the right way to write." What was left out was an analysis of the socio-linguistic component (probably because you were in 5th or 6th grade and this topic is addressed much later in specialized courses). Proper or "improper"…
I see it as pure laziness. The purpose of writing is to communicate and exchange information. Just like misformatting some markup language will result in communications errors, so will not writing proper English with an English-reading audience.
Emojis are different; they're an addition, meant to convey extra meaning or information that's difficult to convey with pure text. Omitting capitals doesn't do this; it just makes the text harder to read.
Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”
#457Earlier quoted context omitted.
Q: What happens when we stop agreeing on what the “good” is? A. I am right and you are evil. Age old conflict resolution method.
He with the biggest gun wins. Now I'm not exactly sure why the side which is currently stoking the culture war is also the one that's disarmed itself, but here we are.
I’m curious, I genuinely dont know what sides you’re talking about. Who do you think is stoking the culture war?
Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”
#458Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's start with this: I don't know how I can explain why this kind of discourse opens trans people up to violence if we can't first agree why this is transphobic. Fundamentally we keep having this conversation in humanity. "This is wrong (homophobic, transphobic, racist, classist, casteist)" "No it isn't!" And over and over and over again. And we look back and think how could it have been possible that we were SO di…
> Fuck, let people live their lives. We all only get one. I think this is greatly simplifying the concerns that people have in transitioning minors, the statistically anomalous rise in minors that identify as trans [1], and the safety of puberty blockers. For example, see the data that guided the recent Swedish health board decisions to mostly stop puberty blockers. I'm pointing out "minors", because it's all I see i…
No post body was provided.
Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”
#459Earlier quoted context omitted.
> was immaculately conceived, walked on water, turned water into wine, all things that you and I know are inconsistent with reality. All those things are completely consistent with reality. Every year there are virgin births[0] (not immaculate conceptions[1], which is a term specific to the birth of the Virgin Mary herself), water turning into wine[2], and people walking on water[3]. I think what you mean is, the spe…
> but unlikely events are still consistent with reality We name people who overly act on this premisse as schizophrenics.
I recommend watching this to broaden your views: https://youtu.be/If3cNUixEBM
Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”
#460As usual, the academic sociopoliticals don't want to delve into issues of wealth and poverty. Notably this has been a real issue in pharmaceutical drug safety trials, which have tended to exploit poor populations in industrialized countries as well as, more recently, the impoverished populations in developing nations. There's no mention of this whatsoever, instead it's about this: "We also developed two specific sect…
>That's an explicit fundamentally important ethical issue, but raising it might imperil academic funding from pharmaceutical corporations, so they stick to their safe topics.
That's exactly what it is. It's like theatre. No one is consistently talking about that issue, or a host of other issues. The focus is always on a few highly polarized and controversial issues. No one is really interested in breaking character and trying to change the conversation to something of substance. It's easier that way, everything is predictable and controlled.