Quote from: 4v4l0n42 on June 25, 2011, 07:20:23 PM

Quote from: andes on June 25, 2011, 06:57:45 PM

First off, there is no absolute objetivity whatsoever. That is a naive simplification. In fact, if you believe in science, you must necessarily come to the conclusion that objective reality is an ilusion.

True. And it's a strawman argument. Nobody said that with science you get the best objective decision. However, you can make the best with the knowledge available at the moment, and that is constantly changing.

I really don't see why people have such a difficulty understanding the basics of the scientific method. Science tells you what is the best up to that point, with the information available. As more information comes in, you make better predictions, create better theories and better experiments. It's not a fallacy of the method, it's how it's supposed to work.

When the first ideas of non-Euclidean geometry were introduced, we didn't throw geometry out of the window. We gained more knowledge. When Einstein proposed the theory of relativity, we didn't burn the books about Newtonian mechanics.

Why do you keep thinking in absolute, philosophical terms? If you want to better manage a society, you need to be practical and talk about real things.

Talk about fallacies! You say you understand the scientifc method, but you sound more like a brainwashed cult follower, than a scientist. Where in the world did you learn that science tells me what is the best for me? This is nonsense.

I am am engineer, so I understand the scientific method very well. And so did Galileo 400 years ago. What I dont understand is the fixation of you guys with the scientific method, as if it was some new cool discovery. Most of the man made things you see arround you were made one way or another using the scientific methd. The scientific method is all arround us, it is nothing new, nothing exclusive of your movement. Its the most common thing arround in our technological world.

Also, from what you write I think you dont understand subjectivity at all. You confuse the concept of precision, and accuracy of science, with the concept of subjectivity. These concepts are not related.

Science is about description and predicion of natural laws. It is just a man-made mental frame to attack certain problems. It deals very well at explaining the simple "dead" parts of our universe (i.e. astronomy, classical mechanics, chemistry). It deals increasingly worst with the more complex phenomena (living organisms, psycology). It starts to disintegrate when trying to explain the fundamental fabric of spacetime (quantum physics --> most scientists now believe in the existence of multiple universes). And then it fails utterly at explaining the fundamental nature of reality itself, and the nature of consiousness. And it must fail, of course, because science itself is a creation of counsiousness, a tool of the mind. A hammer cannot explain the nature of a carpetener.

And regarding value-based decision making: Science cant tell me allways whats best for me! Ultimately, what it is best for me, has to do with my own values. Its subjective in nature. It is an integral part of my consciousness, something science will never explain. If you try to impose to me whats best for me, I will impose to you my fist.

I tend to see your movement as trying to use a fallacius and simplistic association between science and values, to impose a certain worldview over others. This is dangerous. It has been done before with disatrous results.

The misuse of science has made this world a mess. We dont need more science fanatics, we need more understanding and respect for ourselves and our world. We have plenty of science arround us, we lack human morality and decency.