Normal Science Is Religion

  • 20 Replies
  • 6293 Views
*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16504
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Normal Science Is Religion
« on: September 14, 2014, 11:31:27 AM »
Looking at science in its most common state, that of "normal" science (as Kuhn might put it), we see a simple and obvious reason why the Earth may indeed be flat and this fact would be ignored by experts.  The pursuit of "normal" science is to deductively and non-additively "fill-in" missing details of the currently held paradigm. Scientists in their pursuit of truth do not create new paradigms and models to suit new and contrary information; likewise they do not act by means of falsification. They do not falsify a given paradigm but instead search through endless ad hoc hypotheses to unify their findings with the current model - to raise consistency between their current paradigm | model and nature. Also of note is that to abandon their paradigm is to abandon their expertise and possibly invalidate all work prior in their life. They seldom if ever create theory to explain paradox or inconsistency, and when they do it is the exception to the rule; and a poor one at that as it often takes much time for it to be accepted or incorporated meaningfully into paradigm and usually only  after paradigm has been changed through revolution. The scientist is as frozen in his beliefs as any religious man.

A scientist therefore, in times of non-scientific crisis, is no different than a devotee of any particular religion. His existence as a scientist depends on his blind (and historically always misplaced) faith in his current paradigm; without this he is unable to function as a scientist.

Zetetic science is a science always in crisis, and so a zetetic scientist is not pigeonholed by entrenched belief systems. We search for truth without the heavy burden of axioms that must be carried and we do this by admitting to a larger dialogue - a more pantheonistic and less religious science.
Quantum Ab Hoc

Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #1 on: September 14, 2014, 01:06:26 PM »
Greetings, My Dear Fellow!

This is certainly a most provocative post! 

Paint not the community of scientists with too broad a stroke; For I am among those scientists - amateur, admittedly - whose experiments and calculations point to the existence of a flat earth.  Of course, my experiments are informed by objective observation, which tells me that the world I see is flat, as well as a strong, unwavering moral theology.

We must differentiate between those scientists whose work is (a) well-meaning but simply inaccurate;  and those whose work is (b) deliberately intended to mislead.  Additionally, we cannot entirely rule out the nefarious effects of demons, spirits, gnomes, and wizards on our society's ability to comprehend our flat earth as it really is. 

But thankfully, the denizens of this online dominion are getting the word out, so that others may one day realize the folly of their beliefs. 

Please consider me a kindred spirit in your endeavors.

Yours Truly,

Flatso
« Last Edit: September 14, 2014, 01:13:32 PM by Flatso »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39595
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #2 on: September 14, 2014, 01:20:13 PM »
We search for truth without the heavy burden of axioms that must be carried...
Incorrect.  Your greatest burden is the axiom that the earth is flat.  this axiom must be defended and carried forward despite any evidence to the contrary.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2014, 01:21:47 PM by markjo »
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #3 on: September 14, 2014, 02:38:55 PM »
We search for truth without the heavy burden of axioms that must be carried...
Incorrect.  Your greatest burden is the axiom that the earth is flat.  this axiom must be defended and carried forward despite any evidence to the contrary.
Good point. Almost everything I have seen on this page is a variation of "1. let's say the Earth is flat. 2. let's make up explanations for all the stuff that wouldn't work", without any actual evidence suggesting a FE. Only explanations for stuff that wouldn't work on a "simple" FE.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #4 on: September 14, 2014, 06:30:12 PM »
Additionally, we cannot entirely rule out the nefarious effects of demons, spirits, gnomes, and wizards on our society's ability to comprehend our flat earth as it really is.


Please confirm that you have your tongue planted firmly within your cheek.  And in future, please also try and add something constructive to the debate.


Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #5 on: September 15, 2014, 04:54:50 AM »
That is, without doubt, one of the most ridiculous claims I've ever heard made. Science is NOT religion. Religion relies on something that cannot be proven logically, namely, that God exists. Although there are strong arguments to suggest that he does, there are no logically conclusive arguments that guarantee that fact. I'm a religious man, but even I recognise this fact.

Science, on the other hand, relies on the scientific method. This method of experiment and testing accepts nothing without absolute proof and certainty. In fact, this is precisely why science cannot accept that God exists.

Arguing that science has not proven that the Earth is round is a losing battle. The fact is, it has. Since Aristotle, men have known this, and with the advent of space travel, we have seen it with our own eyes.

There is absolutely NO proof for the FE hypothesis. In trying to prove it, the amount of circumlocutions that one has to make are absolutely mind-boggling.


*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39595
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2014, 05:29:40 AM »
Science, on the other hand, relies on the scientific method. This method of experiment and testing accepts nothing without absolute proof and certainty.
Actually, that isn't quite right.  Science recognizes that in many cases, there is no such thing as absolute proof.  Certainty is generally based the degree of confidence of the accuracy of the evidence, but also recognizing that there is always a degree of uncertainty based on potential errors in the collection and interpretation the evidence.  After all, if Einstein was absolutely certain that Newton was correct, then he never would have come up with relativity.

If anything, that is the difference between science and religion.  Religion is locked into its dogma while science is able to adapt to new ideas.  Science would even accept FET, if the evidence supported it better than RET.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2014, 06:19:32 AM by markjo »
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #7 on: September 15, 2014, 07:22:30 AM »
MARKJO, I'll grant the point on science. Re: religion, I'm inclined to agree, in terms of most religion that I've encountered. One of the strengths that I've found in Judaism is its willingness to argue with even what most people would regard as it's core tenants. There is only one believe you can't argue with, and that's the oneness of God. But the rest of it tends to be fair game. But this thread is not a Judaism thread, so I won't derail it. That is the extent of my commentary on that. As regards science, you are quite right. I stand corrected.

Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2014, 09:12:45 AM »
Science, on the other hand, relies on the scientific method. This method of experiment and testing accepts nothing without absolute proof and certainty.

Actually, no.  Almost the apposite in fact.

Mathematics is the only place you will find proof.  Everywhere else you have theories supported by differing levels of evidence.  To be a scientific theory, it must be falsifiable - ie not stated in terms of "absolute proof and certainty".
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2014, 11:32:17 AM »
Well, JIMMY, I'll grant you this one. When you're right, your right, and this time, you are. We definitely have our disagreements, but maybe you're not such an idiot after all. :)

Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #10 on: September 16, 2014, 10:10:27 AM »
Greetings, My Dear Fellow!

This is certainly a most provocative post! 

Paint not the community of scientists with too broad a stroke; For I am among those scientists - amateur, admittedly - whose experiments and calculations point to the existence of a flat earth.  Of course, my experiments are informed by objective observation, which tells me that the world I see is flat, as well as a strong, unwavering moral theology.

We must differentiate between those scientists whose work is (a) well-meaning but simply inaccurate;  and those whose work is (b) deliberately intended to mislead.  Additionally, we cannot entirely rule out the nefarious effects of demons, spirits, gnomes, and wizards on our society's ability to comprehend our flat earth as it really is. 

But thankfully, the denizens of this online dominion are getting the word out, so that others may one day realize the folly of their beliefs. 

Please consider me a kindred spirit in your endeavors.

Yours Truly,

Flatso

"those whose work is (b) deliberately intended to mislead." Do you have an explanation of why they do this?
Life is a big trick.

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • Eppur si muove!
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2014, 10:45:43 AM »
The pursuit of "normal" science is to ... "fill-in" missing details of the currently held paradigm. Scientists in their pursuit of truth do not create new paradigms and models to suit new and contrary information...

Of course there have been paradigm shifts. Atomic theory. The Copernican Revolution. Relativity. Quantum theory. Many scientists would love to create a new paradigm. But paradigm shifts occur when they are needed to explain new data that doesn't fit the current model, not because you happen not to like the current one.
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16504
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #12 on: September 21, 2014, 08:47:36 AM »
The pursuit of "normal" science is to ... "fill-in" missing details of the currently held paradigm. Scientists in their pursuit of truth do not create new paradigms and models to suit new and contrary information...

Of course there have been paradigm shifts. Atomic theory. The Copernican Revolution. Relativity. Quantum theory. Many scientists would love to create a new paradigm. But paradigm shifts occur when they are needed to explain new data that doesn't fit the current model, not because you happen not to like the current one.
As it turns out, the reason scientific crisis and then revolution occurs is not to explain new data. Both normal and revolutionary sciences primary role is to deal with data discrepancies. Normal science does this through a necessary and a logically unjustifiable faith in the current paradigm. Without this basis normal science can not advance. The X-Ray, while providing new data, did not trigger crisis or revolution. Also, the Copernican Revolution, which you mention, held theories that were more complex, at most similar accuracy, and answered fewer questions about "new data" than its competitors in the Ptolemy camp at the time. These are also a set of problems that have container those that been around for a while and those to come due to the Copernican theory.

New data that does not fit the paradigm can be found everywhere. It is what normal science spends the majority of its time on. Take the rotating galaxy velocities and the claims to "dark matter." These are two huge potential sources of crisis - and of "Normal" science 'puzzles". Indeed one can see any "problem" or "Puzzle" in normal science as a seed for crisis. 

Quote
For what differentiates normal science from science in a crisis state? Not surely, that the former confronts no counterinstances. On the contrary, what we previously called the puzzles that constitute normal science exist only because no paradigm that provides a basis for scientific research every completely resolves all its problems ... every problem that normal science sees as a puzzle can be seen, from another viewpoint, as a counterinstance and thus source of crisis.

Take also where early in Newtonian theory and the inverse square relation new data would have demanded a paradigm shift, but instead attempts at this shift were largely ignored - later to be seen as justified.

So to say crisis arrives due to "new data" seems both hasty and against historical evidence. Lots more of examples of anomaly can be found in QED, string theory, the big bang etc.  In every direction we look available to us are thousand of examples of data that doesn't fit the new model. All scientific work currently existing is there because of this gap between our paradigm and truth. It would be fairly easy to take you on your point and then turn around and argue that science (or at least theoretical physics) is indeed in crisis.

What I am suggesting here is a return to a panlogical structure in science which showed us amazing advances very early in humanities history (the classical age, notably.) By ignoring under-emphasizing the "clean up" religious phase of science, we can be lead to a more agile body of knowledge. We are dwarfing our ability to adapt to new data by taking on our current paradigm as an almost religious code - despite it being falsified; it doesn't take an evolutionary biologist to tell you what happens when things stop evolving.

Quantum Ab Hoc

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16504
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #13 on: September 21, 2014, 08:51:01 AM »
We search for truth without the heavy burden of axioms that must be carried...
Incorrect.  Your greatest burden is the axiom that the earth is flat.  this axiom must be defended and carried forward despite any evidence to the contrary.
Eh, I disagree. If I discovered the earth was some other descriptor, I'd be happy to adjust my views or at least incorporate the new evidence.
Quantum Ab Hoc

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16504
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #14 on: September 21, 2014, 09:02:32 AM »
Science, on the other hand, relies on the scientific method. This method of experiment and testing accepts nothing without absolute proof and certainty.
Actually, that isn't quite right.  Science recognizes that in many cases, there is no such thing as absolute proof.  Certainty is generally based the degree of confidence of the accuracy of the evidence, but also recognizing that there is always a degree of uncertainty based on potential errors in the collection and interpretation the evidence.  After all, if Einstein was absolutely certain that Newton was correct, then he never would have come up with relativity.

If anything, that is the difference between science and religion.  Religion is locked into its dogma while science is able to adapt to new ideas.  Science would even accept FET, if the evidence supported it better than RET.
Actually, science recognizes, at least on the philosophy of science level, that none of its propositions are true. Whether one holds to Poppers falsification, Kuhns model of Crisis, Foucalt's dialogue, or even Feyerbends Anarchy  all hold science is incapable of "proof".  Adding certainty, as Popper points out, simply leads to an infinite logical regression of accountability upon which a line of demarcation must be made I would hazard through faith, consistency, or convenience.

If one looks at the particular theory in discussion, Normal Science is completely locked into dogma and is without ability to accept new ideas (take the X-Ray for example which was not fully assimilated into theory until after revolution, despite existing far before it).
« Last Edit: September 21, 2014, 09:26:09 AM by J Davis »
Quantum Ab Hoc

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16504
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #15 on: September 21, 2014, 09:04:58 AM »
Science, on the other hand, relies on the scientific method. This method of experiment and testing accepts nothing without absolute proof and certainty.

Actually, no.  Almost the apposite in fact.

Mathematics is the only place you will find proof.  Everywhere else you have theories supported by differing levels of evidence.  To be a scientific theory, it must be falsifiable - ie not stated in terms of "absolute proof and certainty".

While "falsification" is a nice way to sleep at night, in the end history shows science ignores when results are falsified and instead will treat them as puzzles and problems to be overtaken rather than anomaly and disproof to theory that should lead to paradigm diversity or at least paradigm change. Its an instance of herding.

I agree with the sentiment though - mathematics is the only place you'll find proof ; other than a nice bourbon of course.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2014, 09:25:23 AM by J Davis »
Quantum Ab Hoc

*

The Ellimist

  • 538
  • "Let us play a game, Crayak."
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #16 on: September 21, 2014, 05:43:09 PM »
We search for truth without the heavy burden of axioms that must be carried...
Incorrect.  Your greatest burden is the axiom that the earth is flat.  this axiom must be defended and carried forward despite any evidence to the contrary.
Eh, I disagree. If I discovered the earth was some other descriptor, I'd be happy to adjust my views or at least incorporate the new evidence.

Lol liar.
Additionally, we cannot entirely rule out the nefarious effects of demons, spirits, gnomes, and wizards on our society's ability to comprehend our flat earth as it really is. 

Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #17 on: September 21, 2014, 06:34:04 PM »
While "falsification" is a nice way to sleep at night, in the end history shows science ignores when results are falsified and instead will treat them as puzzles and problems to be overtaken rather than anomaly and disproof to theory that should lead to paradigm diversity or at least paradigm change. Its an instance of herding.

How is treating negative results "as puzzles and problems to be overtaken" ignoring them?  To me that sounds like it's addressing them.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #18 on: September 21, 2014, 07:46:21 PM »
Science, on the other hand, relies on the scientific method. This method of experiment and testing accepts nothing without absolute proof and certainty.

Actually, no.  Almost the apposite in fact.

Mathematics is the only place you will find proof.  Everywhere else you have theories supported by differing levels of evidence.  To be a scientific theory, it must be falsifiable - ie not stated in terms of "absolute proof and certainty".

While "falsification" is a nice way to sleep at night, in the end history shows science ignores when results are falsified and instead will treat them as puzzles and problems to be overtaken rather than anomaly and disproof to theory that should lead to paradigm diversity or at least paradigm change. Its an instance of herding.

I agree with the sentiment though - mathematics is the only place you'll find proof ; other than a nice bourbon of course.

You are painting all results with the same brush. It appears as if you are giving extra importance to the more prominent or famous results in the history of science rather than treating each experimental outcome as equal.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39595
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #19 on: September 22, 2014, 09:09:39 AM »
John, I think that this article was written just for you:
Here's one certain sign that something is very wrong with our collective mind: Everybody uses a word, but no one is clear on what the word actually means.

One of those words is "science."
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Normal Science Is Religion
« Reply #20 on: October 04, 2014, 12:59:41 PM »
Well, JIMMY, I'll grant you this one. When you're right, your right, and this time, you are. We definitely have our disagreements, but maybe you're not such an idiot after all. :)
I think he learned that from me.
He's still an idiot.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.