The Myth of the Noble Scientist

You (most likely purposefully) confuse respecting people whom are worthy of respect based on their accomplishments, and the accomplishments of those like them, with "bowing before idols". References like that serve only to sway the weak minded whom are brainwashed by people like you into thinking that believing what any authority figures tell you is = to being a "sheep" or any other of the many derogatory terms thrown around.

Science has affected almost every aspect of our lives in very direct and significant ways. Heck, there is a huge portion of the population that is only alive BECAUSE of science and its advancements. And so many more that are able to live their lives in a more positive happy manner because of science. Not to mention so many of the small conveniences we have because of science. So it shouldn't come as any surprise that scientists are looked at with high amounts of respect, more so than most professions. They are the bearers of the torch in our search for knowledge. And knowledge is power.

It also shouldn't come as any surprise that a scientist, whom worked so hard to acquire the knowledge and intelligence to obtain that position and title would be very proud of it. It's human nature and found in any field of work. And all things considered, they absolutely deserve to be proud.

And it also shouldn't come as any surprise that when "professional critics" (LOL) whom have no particular set of skills or knowledge on the various subject matters, attempt to attack them with bs that is backed by almost no amount of reason or logic, and almost entirely on abstract bs, that you are attacked yourself. There has been nothing from you here but brash assertions not even holding up to basic logic, I mean...you even equate your own perceptions to reality LOL.

So it once again shouldn't come as a surprise to you, that the general opinion of this thread is that you are emoting due to not being one and receiving the same amount of recognition. "They hate us...cuz they aint us..." lol.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I grant you that what you quoted was overstated. I grant you that it was rude. But since when is that new or objectionable on sciforums. Look at all the posts intended to mock "antiscience" or so-called "deniers". None of that is well-written, thoughtful or dispassionate. Look at all the posts in which the philosophy of science is mocked by individuals who have never studied it and know next to nothing about it. That's willful anti-intellectualism. Look at all the threads that mock religious faith, usually in ignorance of the beliefs being mocked and based on the charge that religious belief isn't "scientific". For God's sake (oops) look at all the threads mocking conservative politics and those who support the American Republican party. Some of our moderators seemingly spend most of their time making exceedingly rude and combative posts about those supposed evils. My point is that mocking and insulting opponents while reducing them to caricatures is how things are done here on Sciforums.

My skills in MR-exegesis are limited, but MR was seemingly arguing that science isn't entirely, or perhaps even primarily, a noble saintly endeavor motivated by the selfless pursuit of "truth" and by the dispassionate employment of "reason". It often has baser motives than that. The disillusioned PhD student's complaints suggested (whether one agrees or not) that some large portion of the practice of science is charaterized by the pursuit of funding, by hierarchical social relationships that might not be most conducive to research groups' success, by publishing to pad cv's, and by the pursuit of career advancement and reputation within the discipline.

That's a picture that deviates pretty dramatically from the idealized vision of science as humanity's cognitive ideal that's often promoted by participants here on Sciforums.

I believe that he was making the point that I've just explained. Your complaint seems to be largely stylistic, that his point wasn't stated as clearly as you might have liked and was stated in too rude and aggressive a fashion. Welcome to my world.

My own complaint in this thread isn't so much with scientism (which might indeed have been MR's target) but with hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is intellectual dishonesty. People seem to feel that it's fine for them to post insults and caricatures directed at things that they don't believe in or otherwise dislike. But when MR does exactly the same thing, but directs it against the board's sacred cows, then suddenly it's intolerable.

My observation is that if people don't like what MR's saying, they probably need to write thoughtful and dispassionate posts explaining what's wrong with his underlying points and precisely where they disagree with him. If they aren't sure what his points are, they need to ask for clarification. If they imagine that they are the rhetorically and intellectually superior ones, then they need to act like it. Snark and defensive herd-instinct won't suffice. MR has thrown down the rhetorical gauntlet in this thread, so if anyone has a case to make in rebuttal, they should try to make it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

People have pointed out why he is wrong, he just pretends they didn't.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If MR were a reasonable interlocutor, that might be a reasonable suggestion. But then, if he were, he would not be gratuitously abusive in the first place.

P.S. Also, let us remember this is, actually, a science forum. So how clever a rhetorical strategy is it to come here and just insult, not only science, but the motives and character traits of scientists?

 

That doesn't make it right.

While it is probably desirable to keep to the high road, there is no "need" for anything. More to the point, what a poster deserves is a quality of response equal to the quality of what they posted. MR gets far, far better than he deserves.

Here's a good article on the subject:

https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/SelfApptdExp.htm

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Wrong

 

Wrong....but provides insight into where you get your hatred for scientists (it comes from hatred for yourself).

 

This is quite funny in places. However I must admit I did think it slightly unbalanced for a university professor to get quite so emotional on a public web page. But possibly, as a geologist in the USA, he may get a particularly large mailbox of shite from creationists all the time, in which case I suppose I ought to show him some understanding

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Twice now you have quote mined 2 ignorant and so very wrong statements.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

3 now lol

 

That one doesn't even make any sense, which is about average...

 

True! 1 out of 3 ain't bad. No relevance, but that's about average too...

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

For those who bash scientists, where would you put them on a list of objectively minded folks? Consider the following folks.

Politicians, lawyers, salesmen, ministers/priests/rabbis, liberal academics.

I would put scientists above those folks.​

Who would you put above scientists on a list of objective thinkers?

 

Logicians.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Crime detectives. At least they aren't trying to get published in some fancy journal.

 

Most scientists are liberal academics.