What is it about woo that upsets you?

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by wegs, Apr 23, 2019.

  1. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,162
    Do you break out in hives?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    There is always Wu Li,


    Wu Li or Woo?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dancing_Wu_Li_Masters
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2019
    candy and wegs like this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,162
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2019
  8. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,162
  9. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    Even as I am an atheist, I realize that both science and deism seek truth and enlightenment.

    The difference is that each discipline pursues a different area of inquiry. One explores the Physical world, the other the Philosophical world.
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2019
    wegs likes this.
  10. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,162
    This is the most insightful post I’ve ever read on here. After posting my comment, I was hopeful you wouldn’t be offended.

    I may just read this book.
     
    candy and Write4U like this.
  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,864
    Hang on. We're mixing things up here.

    There's nothing wrong with faith or God or anything. None of that's woo. It's only when it's put forth as "science" that it becomes woo-ish.
     
    exchemist and wegs like this.
  12. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,162
    The last time I was on here, it seemed like many of you were oh so rigid, but now? I like this open minded/enlightened side.

    Couldn’t agree more with you!

    Woo is anything really that can’t be proven, yet one insists is backed by scientific evidence. Sometimes, “evidence” is offered, but it’s just erroneous and delusional.
     
  13. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    29,799
    There's a related thing, that involves armchair reasoning uncorrected and (key) uncorrectable by evidence, afflicting the scientifically oriented: the presumption that expressions of doubt in some canard of sociological scientific conventional wisdom is a symptom of woo and is best handled in its least rational form.

    Not granting a counter argument or proposal its strengths, in other words, but treating it as an unsupported assertion of the ignorant and irrational that needs no address. Seeing woo where it isn't, or assigning various claims to wooville because one can find examples of people expressing them in woo language. Judging an idea by its least credible proponents.

    Examples: Nuclear power; Trans fats; The Aquatic Ape hypothesis; The safety and benefits of GMOs; Leaded gas; Various food additives; etc - it's a fairly long list.
    The question becomes: if it is conventional and defended wisdom among the scientifically educated, but fits that definition, is it woo?
     
  14. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 70 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,635
    YES YES YES 10,000 times YES YES YES

    I would say worse because both try hard to integrate into Science

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. candy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    805
    I have never been certain where geometric thought ends and intuition begins; it is a very grey area.
     
  16. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,864
    I don't speak for anyone else but I am rigid in the context of scientific discussion. In the larger context, humans are more than science.
     
    wegs likes this.
  17. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,961
    Well, there are plenty of things that can't be proven but have some scientific evidence to support - like what happens at the event horizon of black holes, or what happened before the first 1x10-43 seconds of the universe. I generally define woo as non-scientific beliefs (i.e. not really supported by any science) that the presenter has a personal interest in promulgating.
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,864
    No, sorry. The Scientific Method and the discipline of science do not prove anything. SR is not proven; natural selection is not proven; GR is not proven;etc.
    None of these things will ever be proven.

    They make predictive working models that have a preponderance of evidence.
     
  19. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,162
    I think that a preponderance of evidence is proof that a theory is sound. Such evidence motivates acceptance, it establishes the validity of a theory. If you want to split hairs, you can. But, that's my thoughts to it.
     
  20. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,162
    I'd say only if the person is trying to integrate religion/supernatural beliefs, into science. Many spiritual people don't do that. Having said that, there are scientists who have religious beliefs, yet still stay intellectually honest with regards to science.
     
  21. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,162
    My reply to Dave, could fit here, too. But, on this site specifically, there have been many threads created by people in favor of pseudo-science/woo, who intertwine science into their ''theories.'' Can you give an example or two? Threads about Big Foot, and alien sightings, come to mind - if that's what you mean?
     
  22. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    SR can be proven. The Doppler effect is a demonstrable phenomenon.
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2019
  23. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,162
    No. It's woo when there is a lack of evidence to support ''unconventional'' ideas, that wouldn't ever likely be supported by the science community. Perhaps it comes down to what a reasonable person would think, as a jury member for example, listening to evidence in a court case. If there is reasonable doubt towards an alleged theory, because there is no evidence to support it (not merely because it sounds ridiculous) then, that would be a trait of woo, in my opinion.

    Off topic, I wish I had multi-quoted and put the last four posts in one.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2019

Share This Page