this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
582 points (96.0% liked)

Political Memes

9085 readers
2302 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 20hzservers@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This guy's a nut job his whole argument is that 100% truth cannot be known while admitting that science is a great tool for knowing 99% of the truth he's actually proud of being 1% correct. 😅

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah, Newtonian gravity is 99% correct. It's extremely useful most of the time, but it's wrong. Forgetting that fact is a slippery slope to more damaging assumptions.

[–] 20hzservers@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Bro, theories are rarely proven "wrong" it's more that they are built upon when studies come along that shed more light on a specific phenomenon. It's better to say that science tries to become more correct than to say it is proven wrong. I'm open to new empirical evidence changing my view but you only have your annecdotal story to back up your claims. I'm not forgetting that fact you are.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's better to say that science tries to become more correct than to say it is proven wrong.

Exactly, or proven right. Science is the process of developing models which more closely approximate the world we see. It's a fantastic tool for doing that, and the best tool we have for improving knowledge overall. But it cannot support absolute declarations. There is always the possibility that a future theory shows inadequacies in the present one.

People like you seem to think that our present theories are fundamentally special, that we've reached the pinnacle of knowledge. What's the difference between you, and the highly educated scientists over the centuries who laughed at far-fetched theories that we use today?

Do I think astrology is a particularly useful or accurate model? No, not really. But once you start down the path of absolutism it slithers bit by bit into more and more uncertain topics. It's a troubling trend that turns otherwise intelligent people into fundamentalists.

Acknowledging the potential of a theory I don't personally believe is a small price to pay for mental hygiene.

[–] 20hzservers@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] 20hzservers@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You're way too worked up over this topic. Name calling that other guy and "I've done way more math than you."... Bro you need to get off the uppers. Look in a mirror.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Homie, I was civil up to the moment he started acting like an ass, far past that. I didn't call anyone anything until he did. Dude needs to reexamine himself, you can join him.

[–] 20hzservers@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Naw bro you sarcastically called him omniscient first. Have a good day.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

Yes, because he resolutely claimed absolute certainty, making sweeping, unsubstantiated statements that were just demonstrably false. That's just fundamentally unscientific. My comment was more of a rhetoric device than name-calling.

I don't give half a shit about astrology, what I am passionate about is flippant, unsubstantiated certainty pretending to be scientific thought. It's, as I've said, a brain rot that undercuts the very principles of science. It makes people arrogant, needlessly shuts down thought, and just generally makes a farce of the scientific method. It's not science, it's science fundamentalism, science apologism. It's a poison worth fighting.