Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 1 of 17  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 17 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Scientific Rationale
8 years ago  ::  Nov 25, 2009 - 5:29PM #1
caduceus
Posts: 1,274


html_removed

html_removed
html_removed
html_removed



Scientific Rationale,


a reason, based on supporting scientific evidence, that a particular action is chosen.


Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 8th edition. © 2009, Elsevier.


 


All rationale these days is assumed to be scientific and that not derived from such a source or labeled this way is deemed unreliable.


The logic behind it is as usual circular, being, that scientific rationale is supported by science and science by its own rationale. The original rationale derived from and supported by a minority group of ultra-conservative and self-serving senior scientists.


There is no redress or means of appeal for any decision made as criticism is referred back to the same group who then become the defendant, judge and jury.


It's all wonderfully democratic and nothing that does not conform to the ideology of the peer group will pass the filter.


This inevitably has a knock-on effect in decision-making and problem solving, culminating in a block on anything that has not already been through the filter.


It can only logically be assumed that the regime is a disincentive to any new ideas.


 


www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/pubs/95handbook....

“We live at the level of our language. Whatever we can articulate we can imagine or explore. All you have to do to educate a child is leave him alone and teach him to read. The rest is brainwashing.”
Ellen Gilcrist
Visit my website
www.n-atlantis.com
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Nov 25, 2009 - 6:08PM #2
teilhard
Posts: 53,304

The Natural Sciences


 -- in General --


are an EXCELLENT Way of getting Information


about how The Universe works -- and that's ALL, Folks ...


 


When some Folks make the gross Error


of then extrapolating-collapsing ALL Genuine Understanding


into "Science" and "Rational-ism" and "Material-ism,"


THEN The "Scientific Rationale" becomes ...


a HINDRANCE to Genuine Understanding ...

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Nov 25, 2009 - 6:17PM #3
koala972
Posts: 879

Nov 25, 2009 -- 5:29PM, caduceus wrote:


html_removed

html_removed html_removed html_removed



Scientific Rationale,


a reason, based on supporting scientific evidence, that a particular action is chosen.


Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 8th edition. © 2009, Elsevier.


 


All rationale these days is assumed to be scientific and that not derived from such a source or labeled this way is deemed unreliable.


The logic behind it is as usual circular, being, that scientific rationale is supported by science and science by its own rationale. The original rationale derived from and supported by a minority group of ultra-conservative and self-serving senior scientists.


There is no redress or means of appeal for any decision made as criticism is referred back to the same group who then become the defendant, judge and jury.


It's all wonderfully democratic and nothing that does not conform to the ideology of the peer group will pass the filter.


This inevitably has a knock-on effect in decision-making and problem solving, culminating in a block on anything that has not already been through the filter.


It can only logically be assumed that the regime is a disincentive to any new ideas.


 


www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/pubs/95handbook....




Many years ago I met a group of people who looked at a specific scientific experiment and the direction that was chosen as a result of that experiment and said hey wait a minute the conclusions were arbitrary and biased... and further study was done in such a way to support the conclusions making it a self-fulfilling prophecy.  They showed how you could make an alternate set of conclusions *from the same data* and go in an entirely different direction, and did enough work in that area to show there was merit.  Then they of course asked scientists for help in this... and the general consensus of everyone they asked was, no.  Mostly they weren't told why, but,  they actually got one scientist to say, "yes, this idea has merit and should be further studied *in a perfect world*, but, based on what other scientists want to believe about the nature of this experiment, the practicality is I'm likely to be out of a job if I actually do that."


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Nov 25, 2009 - 6:36PM #4
teilhard
Posts: 53,304

Indeed,


"The Data" and "The Interpretation OF The Data"


are NOT the SAME Thing ...

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Nov 25, 2009 - 6:43PM #5
koala972
Posts: 879

Nov 25, 2009 -- 6:36PM, teilhard wrote:


Indeed,


"The Data" and "The Interpretation OF The Data"


are NOT the SAME Thing ...




:)

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Nov 25, 2009 - 8:59PM #6
nicoletate
Posts: 3,398

Nov 25, 2009 -- 6:08PM, teilhard wrote:

The Natural Sciences


 -- in General --


are an EXCELLENT Way of getting Information


about how The Universe works -- and that's ALL, Folks ...


 



The fact that nature works well enough for the universe and life to be here,..is the point.There is a disadvantge in claiming that a natural creativity could not have happened,..when nature happens to work NATURALLY. That is a positive claim, therefore anyone that makes it has a burden of proof,..REMEMBER THAT!!
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Nov 25, 2009 - 9:39PM #7
teilhard
Posts: 53,304

Nov 25, 2009 -- 8:59PM, nicoletate wrote:

Nov 25, 2009 -- 6:08PM, teilhard wrote:


The Natural Sciences


 -- in General --


are an EXCELLENT Way of getting Information


about how The Universe works -- and that's ALL, Folks ...


 


The fact that nature works well enough for the universe and life to be here,..is the point.There is a disadvantge in claiming that a natural creativity could not have happened,..when nature happens to work NATURALLY. That is a positive claim, therefore anyone that makes it has a burden of proof,..REMEMBER THAT!!



 


Yes ...


 


The Initial Conditions of The Big Bang


apparently made POSSIBLE everyThing


that IS Possible ...

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Nov 25, 2009 - 9:42PM #8
F1fan
Posts: 13,500

So, this is the thread where certain types of theists can gripe about how science doesn't validate their beliefs. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Nov 25, 2009 - 10:01PM #9
teilhard
Posts: 53,304

Nov 25, 2009 -- 9:42PM, F1fan wrote:


So, this is the thread where certain types of theists can gripe about how science doesn't validate their beliefs. 




 


It IS ... ???


 


huh ...

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Nov 25, 2009 - 10:14PM #10
koala972
Posts: 879

Nov 25, 2009 -- 10:01PM, teilhard wrote:


Nov 25, 2009 -- 9:42PM, F1fan wrote:


So, this is the thread where certain types of theists can gripe about how science doesn't validate their beliefs. 




 


It IS ... ???


 


huh ...




i'm looking forward to the DEFEAT of SCIENCE.  No horrible computers I can use to connect to people.  Using an outhouse in the dreary cold of winter.  Walking to work, barefoot in the snow.  Shivers with joy.  Not.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 17  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 17 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook