Brain cleaned what do you mean about on the same side? Are you a perspectivist?
New Homo erectus Skull Shakes up Palaeontology
by cofty 192 Replies latest social current
-
-
MadGiant
Well, my apologies.. I was wrong, you are right.
"If you're looking to science as your replacement for theology to dogmatically cling to, as if replacing the JW dogma, keep looking: science doesn't stagnate or cater to dogmatic thinking, and doesn't care about what you WANT it to be." - Adam
Never been a witness, never been a "believer" for that matter. My concept of a deity were different and unique.
Take care,
Ismael
-
cofty
Adam you arrogantly ignored my argument and illustration because I dont have a degree. Deal with what people say not who they are.
-
EdenOne
cantleave,
The peer review system is good only in theory. In the real world, it's prone to considerable flaws. There are many really poor quality papers that get published (supposedly after peer review) in scientific publications simply because there are comercial interests behind it. Other times, as in the recent scandals involving the Elsevier publishing house, the papers are reviewd by junior scientists who nod at whatever senior scientists write without really making any serious review, or some scientific magazines simply want to take the money from the scientist who puts forth the paper for publication, and peer review is often low quality or inexistent.
Like I said, peer review is a nice system, but as in many things in life, is also a flawed one in the real world. No, one can't trust everything that gets published just because it has a "science" label on it.
Eden
-
cantleave
However imperfect the peer review system is, it does work and results in the betterment of our understanding of the universe. That can not be said of the myths and legends of iron age goat herders.
-
braincleaned
slimboyfat, although I have leanings towards a measure of perspectivism in the sense that I do believe that vantage point is important as to what angle one (or a group) can see things, hence interpret them — but I am skeptical as to applying it to all cases.
I do believe in epistemological absolutes, although I will concede that absolutes can be hidden by our vantage point. This is why I'm also careful with those too.
Mostly, I don't know. At 54 I am less sure of anything as I was 10 years ago. I'm more open to adapt my understanding to things conflicting my natural bias...
When I mentioned we were on the same side, I was referring to our position on the WTS.
My advice to you was well intentioned. I myself had to clean up my prose from elitist rhetoric. I was sharing that with you sincerely.
When we enter the realm of philosophy, there is a close relation to religion in the sense that our bias can be flattered with clever wording about nothing. I question all philosophy. I am not a friend of dogmatism.
My favorite quote from Bertrand Russell is this one:
" Either the thing is true, or it isn’t. If it is true, you should believe it, and if it isn’t, you shouldn’t. And if you can’t find out whether it’s true or whether it isn’t, you should suspend judgment."Many, philosophize instead of suspending judgement. That's when my skepticism perks up!
But that's me.
I do understand better where you are coming from about "fact" — we will agree to disagree on that one. -
EdenOne
cantleave,
agreed, just pointing out that science is no golden calf either... as much as it has done to advance human improvement.
Eden
-
cantleave
Adam you arrogantly ignored my argument and illustration because I dont have a degree.
If that is true then Adam is a total ass! I have a degree and a masters but genuinely believe that you, Cofty, have a better understanding of evolutionary biology than I or many of graduates (including biologists) that I have worked with in my professional life.
-
-
Phizzy
For SBF "I used to be a Perspectivist but I don't look at things that way now." LOL
Eden One, you are right of course, Peer review is open to fraud or laziness and other problems.
If we really want to check if a paper has been properly peer reviewed it takes quite some effort. I did it a while back, when I doubted the arguments presented in a Paper, and I discovered that all the Peers came from the same school of thought as the writer of the paper, it hardly gave me confidence. That particular paper was never published in a reputable journal where it might have been rightly torn apart.
Even Science journals publish some doubtful stuff from time to time.
That takes nothing away from the Scientific Method, nor does it say that Peer Review is worthless, more often than not the method works.
We do though have to exercise caution and common sense when presented with anything as "truth", as Pilate rightly asked "What is Truth?".