Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Science shouldn't come to socially regre...

Leugen9001
Posts: 495
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/30/2016 4:22:21 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
Science shouldn't come to socially regressive conclusions

In a world where there exist rampant unfairness, where racism, sexism, and microaggressions permeate society, the last thing we need is for science to defend socially regressive thought through its conclusions.

Why is that? Well, the purpose of science is to further humanity. In other words, it needs to create progress. By coming up with socially regressive conclusions, scientists are abusing their talent because they'd be creating social regression, oppression, and privilege imbalances.
:) nac
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/30/2016 4:46:47 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
This is neither a new idea nor a good one
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
Daedal
Posts: 157
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/30/2016 9:03:41 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
Science comes to true conclusions. If you don't like them, then you can try and moderate people's behaviour by education, influence (through the media, for example), bribery and the law.
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/30/2016 9:35:08 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/30/2016 4:22:21 AM, Leugen9001 wrote:
Science shouldn't come to socially regressive conclusions

In a world where there exist rampant unfairness, where racism, sexism, and microaggressions permeate society, the last thing we need is for science to defend socially regressive thought through its conclusions.

Why is that? Well, the purpose of science is to further humanity. In other words, it needs to create progress. By coming up with socially regressive conclusions, scientists are abusing their talent because they'd be creating social regression, oppression, and privilege imbalances.

I strongly disagree. Putting limitations on research or what scientists are allowed to publish throws scientific objectivity and the honest pursuit of knowledge out of the window.
However, I am curious as to what conclusions you have in mind.

On a side note, even if it turned out that white people are inferior to asians in every way or whatever that would have no legitimate ethical implications I could think of.
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
Leugen9001
Posts: 495
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/30/2016 2:45:10 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/30/2016 9:35:08 AM, Fkkize wrote:
At 4/30/2016 4:22:21 AM, Leugen9001 wrote:
Science shouldn't come to socially regressive conclusions

In a world where there exist rampant unfairness, where racism, sexism, and microaggressions permeate society, the last thing we need is for science to defend socially regressive thought through its conclusions.

Why is that? Well, the purpose of science is to further humanity. In other words, it needs to create progress. By coming up with socially regressive conclusions, scientists are abusing their talent because they'd be creating social regression, oppression, and privilege imbalances.

I strongly disagree. Putting limitations on research or what scientists are allowed to publish throws scientific objectivity and the honest pursuit of knowledge out of the window.
However, I am curious as to what conclusions you have in mind.

On a side note, even if it turned out that white people are inferior to asians in every way or whatever that would have no legitimate ethical implications I could think of.

Facts aren't facts if they are politically incorrect. Deal with it. Check your privilege.
:) nac
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/30/2016 5:32:14 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/30/2016 2:45:10 PM, Leugen9001 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 9:35:08 AM, Fkkize wrote:
At 4/30/2016 4:22:21 AM, Leugen9001 wrote:
Science shouldn't come to socially regressive conclusions

In a world where there exist rampant unfairness, where racism, sexism, and microaggressions permeate society, the last thing we need is for science to defend socially regressive thought through its conclusions.

Why is that? Well, the purpose of science is to further humanity. In other words, it needs to create progress. By coming up with socially regressive conclusions, scientists are abusing their talent because they'd be creating social regression, oppression, and privilege imbalances.

I strongly disagree. Putting limitations on research or what scientists are allowed to publish throws scientific objectivity and the honest pursuit of knowledge out of the window.
However, I am curious as to what conclusions you have in mind.

On a side note, even if it turned out that white people are inferior to asians in every way or whatever that would have no legitimate ethical implications I could think of.

Facts aren't facts if they are politically incorrect. Deal with it. Check your privilege.

Guess I readily took the bait.
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/30/2016 7:38:20 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/30/2016 5:32:14 PM, Fkkize wrote:
Guess I readily took the bait.
Well, given that people with degrees seriously propose cr@p like this on a near-regular basis, that's hardly your fault.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
Leugen9001
Posts: 495
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/30/2016 8:30:01 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/30/2016 7:38:20 PM, someloser wrote:
At 4/30/2016 5:32:14 PM, Fkkize wrote:
Guess I readily took the bait.
Well, given that people with degrees seriously propose cr@p like this on a near-regular basis, that's hardly your fault.

Facts are a social construct!
:) nac
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2016 7:36:52 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/30/2016 8:30:01 PM, Leugen9001 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 7:38:20 PM, someloser wrote:
At 4/30/2016 5:32:14 PM, Fkkize wrote:
Guess I readily took the bait.
Well, given that people with degrees seriously propose cr@p like this on a near-regular basis, that's hardly your fault.

Facts are a social construct!

Go relativism! /s
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
Leugen9001
Posts: 495
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2016 4:12:16 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/6/2016 7:36:52 PM, Diqiucun_Cunmin wrote:
At 4/30/2016 8:30:01 PM, Leugen9001 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 7:38:20 PM, someloser wrote:
At 4/30/2016 5:32:14 PM, Fkkize wrote:
Guess I readily took the bait.
Well, given that people with degrees seriously propose cr@p like this on a near-regular basis, that's hardly your fault.

Facts are a social construct!

Go relativism! /s

Facts dont exist if I think their wrong
:) nac
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2016 11:14:00 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/30/2016 8:30:01 PM, Leugen9001 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 7:38:20 PM, someloser wrote:
At 4/30/2016 5:32:14 PM, Fkkize wrote:
Guess I readily took the bait.
Well, given that people with degrees seriously propose cr@p like this on a near-regular basis, that's hardly your fault.

Facts are a social construct!

"Fact(s)" is a word, an utterance, and as such, it has different meanings.

In philosophy a fact is an actual event.
A statement of a fact is a true truth-bearer.

In the course of human activity and speech, the word is used quite differently.
There are statistical facts, scientific facts, religious facts, and plain old opinions that are said to be statements of facts.
So in the land of sloppy language, you are correct. That is how society uses the word.
Among serious scholars, facts are actual events, independent of social norms or expectations.

Historically some serious scholars have incorrectly identified some events as facts.
They had false beliefs about certain events, that were not facts.

"If A, then B", was recognised as a fact, declared to be a fact, but later discovered to be a false statement.
"If A then B" was not a fact, never was a fact, even though society said it was.
In this respect, statements of 'facts' are social constructs, although actual facts are not.
This causes confusion.

In one sense your claim is true, although to serious scholars, it is not.
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2016 6:24:19 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/7/2016 4:12:16 AM, Leugen9001 wrote:
At 5/6/2016 7:36:52 PM, Diqiucun_Cunmin wrote:
At 4/30/2016 8:30:01 PM, Leugen9001 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 7:38:20 PM, someloser wrote:
At 4/30/2016 5:32:14 PM, Fkkize wrote:
Guess I readily took the bait.
Well, given that people with degrees seriously propose cr@p like this on a near-regular basis, that's hardly your fault.

Facts are a social construct!

Go relativism! /s

Facts dont exist if I think their wrong

Agreed. In other news, the sun rises from the west.
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...