Scientific belief in an idea can be just as powerful if the idiolog refuses to look at, or ignores all of the facts presented. I use AGW as an example because there are some scary fanatics running around advocating deindustrialization, because we, as in people, are destrying the earth.Hi There,
In the 70's, we were on the verge of an ice age, because of ozone depletion. Today, or yesterday after the last decade, has been Global Warming. Tomorrow it will be Climate Change (something the informed call seasons) and there will be a call to arms, because we are affecting earths weather patterns. No more than a live volcano under a glacier or solar patterns affecting the global bodies of the solar system or even the magnetic poles of the earth shifting.
To the OP, there will be idiotic things said no matter what belief we have. Should we stop them, absolutely not. If I said 1+1=1 and that is a fact others may believe the same way and not see it as idiotic. However, there will always be people in the 1+1=2 corner. However, I do believe 1+1=1 in a different context, so if you are not looking at the whole you are uninformed and you are the idiot for calling out someone when it is true in a binary state. Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler
I agree with your points as scientific biases. But that is the same i said. Science co-exists with many theoretical streams that can collide, contradict or are even opposite to each other. Science never makes all inclusive statements and only refers to a part of the stream which the research is based on. Every research is also to be critizised. that is a bias or a scientific reference. That has nothing to do with dogma. A dogma is all inclusive and can`t be critizised and is legititmat at all times for universal reference. The reference are science fiction not visible facts that can be reproduced or seen by others too. If i am on mushrooms and say i see the heaven is green then i can say that a s a believe but i will never be able to replicate it unless you slip in my body and see thru my eyes on mushrooms :-). The science as a base for ideologic beliefs (no meat vs. vegan vs. vegetarian vs. alll food worship) . that is still not a foundation for making science a dogma. Although i agree with the points you stated. I think its good to have many views and many scientific methods and facts and facetts because i also think its good to be critical against industrialism and whatnot (Friends of mine work for Greenpeace and for Doctors without limits and there are some ideologies i support. a dogma just does not entitle that to questioning and criticism)
Psychology is alos monogamy-biased when it comes to relationships. I pointed that out as well.,There are some areas where research is done and progressed and some where its not done and progress. But that does not make the science per se a dogma. reserches can be criticised.
I disagree with not stopping idiotic statements (no judgement here) and people who refuse to learn or believe in dogmas (not the OP meant with that) because of the simple fact that we live in a democracy.
That can be quite unfortunate if the mass is stupid :-) hehe. therefor its my right to stop idiocy even on a fun board like that :-) ...
(bad tongues say that living in a democracy means being ruled by a mass of idiots :-)) hehehehe (n o offense just a joke...)
Originally Posted by Becky
Now the people I do not care for are those that will not acknowledge that in fact they are rude too at times.
a loose mouth does not make an intellectual :-)
