The infuriating rise of anti science behavior in every corner of society.

submitted by Bogos from self.GenderCritical

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Why are we treating science like a God? Maybe science doesn't know everything. They can't even explain consciousness.

[–]Realwoman 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Science is very much aware many things are unknown and scientists always point that out. Every scientific paper includes limitations. Woo, on the other hand, claims to have all the answers and the claims are not supported by evidence or they're unfalsifiable. You can objectively prove if a treatment works for a certain condition and after the evidence has been well established, the method becomes regulars medicine.

[–]Bitchcraft 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Science is based on epistemic humility. As in: "we concede we don't know things and the burden of proof is on the one proposing an explanation".

Pro-Science people don't say "science knows everything". Pro-Science people say "science is the best chance we have to figure out the most". The reason science can't explain consciousness is because currently there is no approach to explaining consciousness that doesn't involve pulling things out of your ass, which science rejects.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Science is massively politically driven. According to current science, gender dysphoria is no longer a mental illness (even thought it was just until a few years ago). Should we assume that this is the only area where politics takes precedence over fact?

[–]Bitchcraft 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

According to current science

Science is a method, not an opinion. Some academics say that, and many oppose then. Academia and science are also not the same thing. There are many areas where the opinions of scientists are split, political or not. Science can't and shouldn't work as an authority. It's a practice. You don't need a license to apply scientific methods and have an opinion on a subject in scientific discourse.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Psychology is a social "science" that desperately wants to be a physical science with a pretty horrible history to that fact.

[–]OrneryStruggle 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

To be fair most contemporary psychology research is actually biology research, and involves stuff like staining brain slices, genetically engineering rats to have cancer to measure their hormone levels, etc.

But the woo-woo "personality psychology" and clinical psych fields are... a mess. Anything to do with the DSM in particular is politicking all the way through.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Anything to do with the DSM in particular is politicking all the way through.

I mean, the DSM is a money-making business, so we shouldn't be surprised, but society seems to consider it some infallible bible of mental states.

[–]OrneryStruggle 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think a lot of younger people who are "interested in psychology" grow up loving the DSM because it is like a book about video game character types, like the DnD chaotic evil/lawful neutral types and a lot of confused teens love that sort of cut-and-dry sorting of people/personalities into bins that explain their behaviour. And when so many of the people who are interested in psychology have psychological problems themselves, a lot of the people most interested in the DSM are also those to whom it most applies.

Obviously for the people WRITING the DSM, it is a money-making business, and many of the people on DSM committees even admit that the process is highly flawed and unscientific, but try telling someone who has treated it like a bible since they were 13.