A few days ago I read this article by
, an incredibly popular poster on the Steemit platform.
Frankly, I was a little disturbed by the anti-science tone of the article, one I've noticed as being fairly prevalent here on this site. Now, everyone's entitled to express their own opinion - that's part of what makes this platform in particular so great. But I'm concerned that we haven't heard a lot of voices from the other side to give a more balanced feel to the arguments being made.
I am volunteering to be just such a voice.
In his article
Claiming "facts" is the equivalent of a spoiled brat that demands approval for no reason whatsoever. Not only they can be refuted with equally abstract evidence, but you end sounding like a cult member reciting from a holy book. Let us not turn science, one of the best tools in our disposal, into a meme of entitlement.
Wow. These were statements that deserved more than a mere comment. They needed a proper post in response. Sadly, I wasn't able to get to it until now.
Before I respond to each of the aforementioned statements, I want to express my opinion in general on using scientific facts (or "facts" according to
The scientific method is such a valuable tool in our society because it allows us to extend our reach beyond each individual's intellectual reach alone. It's allowed us to destroy disease, connect the world, and travel to the stars. It's true that it isn't perfect, but science has demonstrated time and time again that it can deliver ever more accurate pictures of our reality.
Whether any given picture is "true" is a philosophical conundrum that has to do with whether it's possible for human beings to ever know any absolute truth. But, I mean, we have to base our opinions on something. Whatever that something is should be a something that has shown itself to have strong predictive power. It should be something that, while not totally immune to human imperfection and bias, does allow us to a great extent to over come it.
In a modern society, when we have discussions about our ideas and opinions, we are literally deciding what our society will look like. Each voice is a tiny piece of the puzzle, spreading from one person to another like neurons firing in an interconnected brain. Our votes, what we watch on television, our standards for how we treat each other - these are all defined by the prevailing thoughts of the period.
It's true that this does require a degree of faith in the scientists themselves... but humanity has always made decisions and built our knowledge on top of previously, rigorously tested and verified, ideas. It may not be perfect, but it's better than common sense alone. Just think about trying to have a 'rational' argument about the abilities of planes to fly before the first one had taken flight. And there are many more things that run counter to common sense and the wiring of the human brain in our world. Science allows us to transcend our limitations to some degree, and I think that rigorously tested and verified ideas are fair play as a tool for use in arguments of almost any kind.
In Part 2 I'll address each of
Thank you so much for reading! If you enjoyed this post, please upvote, resteem, and follow!
Images: 1
Other Posts in this Series:
