All but the last paragraph of my trolling post can be seen a simple "baiting." The last paragraph:
"I do find it perplexing that scientists, as a body, allow The Science to usurp their knowledge and legitimate authority; why they allow The Science to speak on their behalf, even when they profoundly disagree." is not. The Media, "Authorities," Politicians, Leaders of Churches (and other special interest organizations/corporations) do not misunderstand science as much as they know they can mis-use science — as The Science(tm) — with impunity. Those, actual scientists, that, I think, have the most to lose from this mis-use, seem to be (mostly) silent and acquiescent. Nick put 'the public' in the list of those that misunderstand science. I exclude them, and, except for the rabid minority (e.g. those that think evolution means great-great-great-grandpa was a chimpanzee) I would exclude them from the list of abusers. I think the public is far more aware and far more sophisticated than credited. For example: Stephen Hawking's and Stephen Gould's books were best sellers. From conversations in bars and cafes and libraries and bookstores, I believe, that they were widely read and understood — by the public. Because they understand, they see through the pretensions of The Science(tm) and because scientists stand (mostly) mute, they get tarred with the same skepticism that The Science(tm) actually merits. I think this is dangerous! For public policy, society, and humanity. davew On Sat, May 30, 2020, at 9:16 AM, [email protected] wrote: > Dave, > > I think what you have here is a demonstration of how monstrously the > media and the public (and Ted Talks) mis-understand "science". But to > join in your critique, I think we have to embrace that > misunderstanding. Thus you posts seek to congeal that which you abhor. > NO? > > Nicholas Thompson > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > Clark University > [email protected] > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Prof David West > Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 8:51 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Science Commits Suicide (yes, another trolling headline) > > Eric, > > (BTW - nothing said by anyone on this list will ever be taken, at least > by me, as a personal attack. Frank and blunt "bullshit" is always a > possible and possibly called for response to anything, anyone says.) > > That said — au contraire, Eric. There is an incongruity between what I > said, it being labeled BS, and the rationale for the labeling. > > For the past five months I have read headlines and seen references in > stories that prominently state, "Science says ... ," "The Science tells > us ...," "Science suggests ... ," "The Science is settled," etc. (I am > not certain how or why The Science ever became disgruntled and in need > of settling, but ...) > > I have seen eminent human beings stating, "Science says ..." and > politicians (never eminent in my opinion) claiming to be doing, "What > The Science tells us." > > I am pretty sure that "Science" and "The Science" refer to the same > entity, just as Dave and David. > > So, even though I have never met this entity, I am pretty confident in > asserting that It is arrogant, authoritative, claims to be inerrant, > and It dissembles (and or lies) constantly. The Science does make > assertions as if they were unalloyed True Facts. if The Science is > caught out It simply changes the subject — much like another well known > public figure. > > The Science has no regard for the humans it uses as mouthpieces for Its > assertions. So when Dr. Fauci channels The Science in stating, "Science > suggests we have nothing to worry about from this virus" or "The > Science states that face masks are of no value," Dr. Fauci might be > embarrassed when it becomes necessary to reverse course, but The > Science doesn't give a damn. > > None of the preceding is a "claim about the actions of an encompassing > set of people." > > Nothing in the original post referred to people (human scientists in > this case) but solely to the entity, The Science. > > You might argue that there is no such thing as The Science, It has no > ontological status. While I would agree, de jure, I would strongly > disagree, de facto. Every time an eminent personage states, "The > Science ..." or a politician / public health official takes action > based on"The Science," their words/actions cede exactly that status. > > And, I still maintain that The Science is hell bent on self-destruction > and, before long, will lack any vestige of credibility. > > Now, with regard all those people, all those scientists, in your "large > set of people against whom I can test that claim, and it is about as > opposite from factual accuracy as I know how to get in the world of > human behavior." They, most unfortunately, collectively and > individually are going to be collateral damage vis-a-vis loss of > credibility. > > I would offer, as a supporting argument, the status of scientists in a > courtroom. Two humans assert opposing claims as to what The Science > says. The assertions of the humans is discounted because The Science > has no credibility and neither human has derivative credibility. The > jury/judge must find grounds other than credibility for believing one > individual scientist over the other. > > I do find it perplexing that scientists, as a body, allow The Science > to usurp their knowledge and legitimate authority; why they allow The > Science to speak on their behalf, even when they profoundly disagree. > > davew > > > > On Fri, May 29, 2020, at 4:18 PM, David Eric Smith wrote: > > Dave, > > > > > On May 30, 2020, at 12:32 AM, Prof David West <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Science suffers from a similar problem. Making assertions as if they were > > > unalloyed accurate and True Facts when they know that the models, the > > > assumptions, the data (lack of) generate more ambiguity and conclude > > > little more than probabilities. And they constantly change. But Science > > > remains unable to admit to error or ambiguity — generating a facade that > > > is just as false as the "We are always in the right" facade of police > > > departments. > > > > That’s a lot of bullshit. > > > > It is a general claim about the actions of an encompassing set of > > people. I have a large set of people against whom I can test that > > claim, and it is about as opposite from factual accuracy as I know how > > to get in the world of human behavior. > > > > You are, of course, free to believe whatever serves your own needs, > > and I continue to support your right to do it unmolested. You are > > even free to troll up to whatever limits the board moderators consider > > appropriate, and I can’t imagine the above comes anywhere near > > infringing on a limit of decency. > > > > However, if you are trolling in a public place, it is reasonable for > > someone else to flag the trolling as bullshit. > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. > > . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ... > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn > > GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe > > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > > > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. > . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. > . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ... FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
