[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

Political?

Posted By: Chuck Bower
Date: Tuesday, 10 June 2008, at 1:26 p.m.

In Response To: Political? (Bill Riles)

Insults are one thing; attempting to (and often succeeding, given the frail state of both education and ethics present today) belittle by generalizations shows a weakness in one's side of the argument. You do have lots of company, though -- the radio and TV political shows are full of it (pun intended).

Science isn't religion and it isn't politics. Issues are not binary (common term: "black and white") until they've been completely solved -- which in the strictest sense may be never. Scientists (not all, but the good ones) admit that their views could be wrong. It's not a shame to reverse one's position with more evidence. In fact it's both healthy and proper.

I (and Racc) have attempted to point people here in the direction of some scientifically based info. From what I can see, no one but the two of us have bothered doing our homework. So far I've taken the position that it's not up to me to refute non-scientific arguments when the links we've provided do that, and with more study (theirs) than I am currently capable. Even more importantly I could be wrong, and if so, the evidence out there could in fact show that. So simply by listening to me, you potentially deny yourself the opportunity to find the real truth.

I've also learned long ago that on most issues there are polarists who wouldn't accept the other side of an issue if it bit them in the ass. I'm reminded of an Indiana US House member during the Watergate era who said "don't confuse me with the facts; I have a closed mind". At least he admitted it.

I agree that science isn't isolated from the rest of the world. Things like personal philosophical, etc. views and financial incentives do sometimes negatively bias some researchers. However, IMO, to take the cynical view that therefore no one can be believed is as extreme as saying one should choose not to drive a car because there are people out there who abuse that privelege (e.g. DUI) and you could die from the decision. Worse, to take the Rush Limbaugh view that "if so and so, whom I detest, has a particular view then that view by definition is wrong" is not only naive, but damaging. It's certainly the lazy way out, though, compared to digging into the subject and trying to separate evidence from mere opinion.

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.