I'm not entirely disagreeing with you; what you wrote here is valid. I agree our educational studies and practices are tainted with malevolence and communist tactics. I just think it was too much of a blanket statement you made and that some science still has its' place.
Fair enough. I am intentionally being extra harsh on scientists to break the magic spell of their unquestionable authority. This would not be necessary if they did not weaponize the word “Science”. If they want to do that, then I am going to work to destroy the credibility and authority of that word. Obviously the scientific method, when practiced in good faith, continues to be valid. But I am not going to let them turn a method into an “ist” either. “Science” is too vague. If we make them specify and say things like, “Trust the chemistry” or “Trust the biology”, then the magic spell already starts to splinter and sound ridiculous. My comments are not directed at people who are genuinely working the scientific method to achieve practical results. If anything, those people should start identifying with their specific scientific discipline and not this nebulous definition of The Science. True chemists and biologists and physicists should also be equally against the fraudster academics and their bullshit corporate-funded studies and experiments. If you are doing legit work, and another dude who watches beagles get their face eaten off by flies claims he and you are the same, you should reject that too.
I'm not entirely disagreeing with you; what you wrote here is valid. I agree our educational studies and practices are tainted with malevolence and communist tactics. I just think it was too much of a blanket statement you made and that some science still has its' place.
Fair enough. I am intentionally being extra harsh on scientists to break the magic spell of their unquestionable authority. This would not be necessary if they did not weaponize the word “Science”. If they want to do that, then I am going to work to destroy the credibility and authority of that word. Obviously the scientific method, when practiced in good faith, continues to be valid. But I am not going to let them turn a method into an “ist” either. “Science” is too vague. If we make them specify and say things like, “Trust the chemistry” or “Trust the biology”, then the magic spell already starts to splinter and sound ridiculous. My comments are not directed at people who are genuinely working the scientific method to achieve practical results. If anything, those people should start identifying with their specific scientific discipline and not this nebulous definition of The Science. True chemists and biologists and physicists should also be equally against the fraudster academics and their bullshit corporate-funded studies and experiments. If you are doing legit work, and another dude who watches beagles get their face eaten off by flies claims he and you are the same, you should reject that too.