"The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness."
-- Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of the Lancet
"Unless science is controlled by a greater moral force, it will become the Antichrist prophesied by the early Christians."
More of this content please. We aren't going to beat these guys by reading Nietzsche/BAP and being based pagans who do "the Sexual Revolution but based," the only answer is to answer the question of scientism by making it ridiculous and unthinkable
This is an interesting concept, but I believe the problem can be characterized somewhat differently. We suffer not so much from scientism, but rather digital involution. Prior to the past three decades, science was mostly grounded in observations of the real world. Too many decisions are now based on the results of computer simulations:
Most of what I wrote was that science, on a metascientific level, is incapable of dealing with what most people want from science: the truth about the world we live in. It's not that science is being done incorrectly, although honestly, that is also often the case. However, scientific knowledge is limited by how humans experience existence, which is limited and constrained by human biology. It may be true that contemporary science is further degraded because it bases empirical conclusions on computer simulation rather than actual data. I don't know if this is true or not. Even if it is, it does not really change my criticisms of scientism which are not based on the use of computer simulation but instead on certain assumptions people make about science generally.
"The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness."
-- Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of the Lancet
"Unless science is controlled by a greater moral force, it will become the Antichrist prophesied by the early Christians."
-- Charles Lindbergh
Wonderful essay! Keep it up!
Scientism is what happened to science when leftists got control of it.
1. The government funds almost all scientific research.
2. Government regulators decide which studies and experiments happen and which do not get done.
3. Essentially all government regulators are leftists.
4. Scientism.
More of this content please. We aren't going to beat these guys by reading Nietzsche/BAP and being based pagans who do "the Sexual Revolution but based," the only answer is to answer the question of scientism by making it ridiculous and unthinkable
The main reason for America's incarceration rate is obviously blacks, China doesn't have those.
This is an interesting concept, but I believe the problem can be characterized somewhat differently. We suffer not so much from scientism, but rather digital involution. Prior to the past three decades, science was mostly grounded in observations of the real world. Too many decisions are now based on the results of computer simulations:
https://swiftenterprises.substack.com/p/digital-involution
Most of what I wrote was that science, on a metascientific level, is incapable of dealing with what most people want from science: the truth about the world we live in. It's not that science is being done incorrectly, although honestly, that is also often the case. However, scientific knowledge is limited by how humans experience existence, which is limited and constrained by human biology. It may be true that contemporary science is further degraded because it bases empirical conclusions on computer simulation rather than actual data. I don't know if this is true or not. Even if it is, it does not really change my criticisms of scientism which are not based on the use of computer simulation but instead on certain assumptions people make about science generally.
Moon landing is phoney as a rubber dick.
Why worry, the machine does it, one day the distributtion cart didn't show up at the front door.