as written by someone who doesnt actually know
as written by someone who doesn’t actually know what science is, or isn’t.
the thing i really hate most about people who write shit like this (i wish I could better appreciate the irony) is how much stuff like this precludes scepticism about science.
and, you know, it’d be great if a lot more of these ‘free thought’ activists and science evangelists actually were capable of what they claim to practice:
scepticism and a critical mind
we can talk about the mis-application of the scientific method that created biological racism (and its current forms of evolutionary psychology or social psychology).
but in order to correct these errors and refine the method, we need to understand this as science. Bad science, to be sure. Unethical science, without a doubt.
where lies the difference between pseudo-science and science? often, we talk about method. which is right. but that requires that we understand science as method, not product.
we should just have faith in Science ™