Sean points out why science is different from other ways of thinking:
We physicists talk about crazy things all the time — extra dimensions, black holes, quark confinement, wavefunction collapse, conservation of momentum, the Earth moving around the Sun. Things that, on their face, seem to be incompatible with our everyday experience. But we don’t just throw these ideas out there randomly; they are hypotheses that we’re driven to by the constraints put upon us by the data. Some of these ideas may turn out to be wrong, and some may be right, and we have certain well-tested procedures for sorting them out. . . . Unfortunately — and to a signficant extent this is our own fault — it’s not always clear to the person on the street which ideas are speculative and which have come to be accepted, nor is it clear that we have good reasons even for the wildest speculations.
This clarifies everything for me. Unlike scientists, all us ‘tards just throw ideas out there randomly. We don’t make hypotheses, we don’t follow constraints, and we don’t care about data. We don’t have well tested procedures for sorting out which ideas are wrong or right. We don’t distinguish between speculative ideas and accepted ideas, and we don’t have good reasons for our wild speculations.
Are the conclusions of Science the same as Truth? Well, maybe . . . for awhile. Anyway, they’re as good as we can approach it at this time. I mean, if they fit the data, and the conclusions are generally accepted, then they are True. Well, not generally accepted, but accepted by all the scientists. Well, all the scientists who specialize in the particular field in question. Well, not all the specialized scientists, because some are quacks, so more like all the respected specialized scientists. Well, maybe not all the respected specialized scientists, but most of them, at least all the ones that speak a major diplomatic language and have tenure at an accredited university and have published frequently and recently in a respectable peer-reviewed journal and do their own primary research that is not funded by anyone with a conflict of interest.
Well, their conclusions may not be “accepted as True” but at least they are “accepted as statistically probable.” Well, maybe not probable, but at least possible, in terms of the probability cloud given the currently known independent variables and provided that their methodology is sound and their statistical errors are within acceptable parameters and no new unpublished data has recently been found.
And some conclusions may be accepted as True even though they have no supporting data, because they fit within the theoretical constraints imposed by what may be possible based on what the respected scientists think is probable given the data available for the provable theories that have sufficient observable evidence. Or not, depending on the engineers who actually have to work with the materials and equipment pertaining to the theories.
Gosh, I’m so glad there are folks like them scientists who are so Galt-like in their unselfish devotion to holding up the world for all us superstitious, irrational, subspecies hominids. Oh, wait, Galt shrugged off his burden when he was criticized too much. I guess we better start stringin’ up some o’ them Science Haters before they destroy the world, them Science Haters what hates the Truth.
Speaking of the Truth, Twisty is searching for some evidence of The Patriarchy so S/h/ee/it can explain to some clueless readers what it is, where it is, and how to destroy it. The Pat is like this amorphous force that pervades all our thoughts because it was programmed into hominids from an early point in our history, and so it is really hard to find and pin down and extirpate from our ideas. Basically, all human institutions; all sexual, social, and economic relations; all systems of ideas; and the major idea systems which explain and order Western civilization incorporate Pat, an etheric substance through which photons move in outer space and which keeps the planets from spinning wildly out of their orbits. At last, we find a Femifesto to justify a move to the neolithic anarcho-primitivism described by John Zerzan.