Scientism

[Whiskeyjack]

I can't improve on OMM's post above. Kudos on producing such a productive exchange, gentleman. So I apologize for having to share this:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/46h-LfNWPn8?ecver=1" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I might have to rename this thread "Bill Nye Saves the World".

 

[IrishLax]

I can't improve on OMM's post above. Kudos on producing such a productive exchange, gentleman. So I apologize for having to share this:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/46h-LfNWPn8?ecver=1" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I might have to rename this thread "Bill Nye Saves the World".

The best part of this video is the not-so-subtle anti-whiteness. I'm not sure if it gets worse, but I got to the part with the "chocolate" ice cream talking with a rather on-the-nose 'accent', rolled my eyes, and had to stop.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

The best part of this video is the not-so-subtle anti-whiteness. I'm not sure if it gets worse, but I got to the part with the "chocolate" ice cream talking with a rather on-the-nose 'accent', rolled my eyes, and had to stop.

It gets much worse. The "vanilla" cone, representing those with reservations about libertine sexual ethics, is charitably represented as an irrational bible-thumping bigot pushing conversion therapy. The conflict is resolved with an orgy once the more "enlightened" flavors come onto him. Because "Science!", or something.

 

[BeauBenken]

Is that video supposed to be commenting on sexual orientation or biological sexes?

Those are two entirely different things.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Good thing I am on team #froyo

 

[Legacy]

You're on your own in re-titling the thread to breathe some life into it. "Scientism" seems like the obverse of "creationism" minted with the same reactionary purpose. Perhaps the better suggestion would be for serious discussions on science and morality, the posts should rightfully go in Cacky's Science post. This one could remain as a dumping ground.

 

[Cackalacky]

You're on your own in re-titling the thread to breathe some life into it. "Scientism" seems like the obverse of "creationism" minted with the same reactionary purpose. Perhaps the better suggestion would be for serious discussions on science and morality, the posts should rightfully go in Cacky's Science post. This one could remain as a dumping ground.

I should probably let Whiskeyjack expound on this but essentially that is exactly what the intent is. Many people have taken Science and liberalism together and made it such an extreme positions as to border on or actually behave as a religious belief. SO when he says "Scientism" its intent is to convey the rigor with which these people believe and share their beliefs.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

You're on your own in re-titling the thread to breathe some life into it. "Scientism" seems like the obverse of "creationism" minted with the same reactionary purpose. Perhaps the better suggestion would be for serious discussions on science and morality, the posts should rightfully go in Cacky's Science post. This one could remain as a dumping ground.

The thoughtful posts in this thread are about the philosophy of science and epistemology, not scientific discovery per se. Could start a new thread to house those discussions if their proximity to scientistic nonsense here offends you, but they are related. I think there's value in pointing out the nonsense and describing why it's harmful to legitimate scientific inquiry.

I should probably let Whiskeyjack expound on this but essentially that is exactly what the intent is. Many people have taken Science and liberalism together and made it such an extreme positions as to border on or actually behave as a religious belief. SO when he says "Scientism" its intent is to convey the rigor with which these people believe and share their beliefs.

 

[wizards8507]

Serious question, is there any chance this is parody? I've been having the same thoughts about Everyday Feminism, too.

 

[Old Man Mike]

On Cack's quote containing the word "rigor": I'd substitute "vigor" for that. Scientistic spouters are notoriously NOT rigorous in their defense of opinions, but they certainly are vigorous.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Serious question, is there any chance this is parody? I've been having the same thoughts about Everyday Feminism, too.

Does not seem to be parody. All of this ridiculousness came from just the first episode. There are 12 more to follow.

 

[Cackalacky]

On Cack's quote containing the word "rigor": I'd substitute "vigor" for that. Scientistic spouters are notoriously NOT rigorous in their defense of opinions, but they certainly are vigorous.

LOL. Touche'

Please excuse the obvious Freudian Slip

 

[ulukinatme]

Does not seem to be parody. All of this ridiculousness came from just the first episode. There are 12 more to follow.

I'm even more convinced now that they went with a controversial topic for shock factor and to get people talking about the show. Makes it feel like a publicity stunt.

 

[Cackalacky]

I'm even more convinced now that they went with a controversial topic for shock factor and to get people talking about the show. Makes it feel like a publicity stunt.

I am just spitballing here but maybe it is a ploy to reach the millenials and younger kids through what they are accustomed to and desire watching....

 

[Whiskeyjack]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This might be the darkest show Netflix has ever streamed. <a href="https://t.co/1LR5fQ48Hx">pic.twitter.com/1LR5fQ48Hx</a></p>— Chris Morgan (@CR_Morgan) <a href="https://twitter.com/CR_Morgan/status/857023707558105089">April 26, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[wizards8507]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This might be the darkest show Netflix has ever streamed. <a href="https://t.co/1LR5fQ48Hx">pic.twitter.com/1LR5fQ48Hx</a></p>— Chris Morgan (@CR_Morgan) <a href="https://twitter.com/CR_Morgan/status/857023707558105089">April 26, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Legacy]

The thoughtful posts in this thread are about the philosophy of science and epistemology, not scientific discovery per se. Could start a new thread to house those discussions if their proximity to scientistic nonsense here offends you, but they are related. I think there's value in pointing out the nonsense and describing why it's harmful to legitimate scientific inquiry.

I agree OMM's posts are thoughtful and contrbute to a discussion of the philosophy of science and epistemology, which, in my opinion, would be a better thread title and lead to more fruitful exchanges.