|
|
|
|
Dog_Ed
Skeptic Friend
USA
126 Posts |
 Posted - 07/24/2001 : 19:01:55
|
From a recent NY Times story:
"Is it possible that in recent years we've thought outside the box so often that we forget why we ever thought it was a good idea to have a box at all -- a reality model? Is one person's beliefs about what is real as good as another's, and it's impolite to argue otherwise? Where do we draw the line? Has reality simply become a matter of taste?"
Whilst as card-carrying skeptics I suspect most of us will come down on the same side of the issue, this is an interesting observation. Certainly New Age, UFO, and fringe science beliefs are robust in the world, while at the same time we have more hard scientific knowledge about the Universe than ever before. Why? Anybody got a good theory?
"Even Einstein put his foot in it sometimes"
|
|
|
gdaye
New Member
Canada
18 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2001 : 20:15:40 [Permalink]
|
It's entirely possible that there is too much knowledge for the average person, and 'things' are moving too fast. Many people may be uncomfortable with the advances of science, and don't really understand or even believe it. To quell their unease they may be turning to the supernatural to offer easy (but wrong) explanations.
Hey - it's only a theory.
Nolle Illegitimus Carborundum |
 |
|
|
comradebillyboy
Skeptic Friend
USA
188 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2001 : 21:48:15 [Permalink]
|
i am convinced that a sizable slice of the populace simply wants to be given fixed rules to follow. all of the uncertainty generated by science's constantly changing model of reality is scary to lots of folks. if i remember anything from my college psychology class most folks want to feel safe and secure and dont want uncertainty.
just do as i say and everything will be all right.
comrade billyboy |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2001 : 22:01:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
"Even Einstein put his foot in it sometimes"
Einstein seemed to be right about Lambda and dark energy (a/k/a Quintessence), because his ideas are now coming into their own with the discovery by astrophysicists and cosmologists in the 1990s of the accelerating universe.
quote:
It's entirely possible that there is too much knowledge for the average person, and 'things' are moving too fast. Many people may be uncomfortable with the advances of science, and don't really understand or even believe it. To quell their unease they may be turning to the supernatural to offer easy (but wrong) explanations.
Hey - it's only a theory.
Both of the above are good ideas. I really never understood the true believers, but I really feel for them in that they are so very, very wrong about so very, very much.
I think that early experiences and family background have a lot of the blame for all of this. However, it is mostly caused by poor family background all of the way back, since one's parents had parents who had parents, and so on, and so on, all of the way back to Pro Consul and beyond. Breaking free of baloney is the most difficult act. Most people never make it.
And, you know, they would be saying the same thing about me...
Can't win...
ljbrs
Perfection Is a State of Growth... |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2001 : 14:04:24 [Permalink]
|
It's entirely possible that there is too much knowledge for the average person,
Yeah, I remember that film noir scene. The thug grabs the stooge by his lapels and slaps his face. "You know too much," he growls.
Had a Prof. when I was an under graduate who declared that 'until the middle of the eighteenth century it was possible for an educated man (people didn't feel the need to be all inclusive in their speech in those by gone days) to know "everything." But no more could anyone claim that.' Of course since he said that in the 60's the amount of information we posses has increased by a staggering amount.
Now it is no longer possible to know 'everything' even about your chosen field. (Consider the auto mechanic. Not only does my car not have a mechanical carburetor; it has seven computers with which it senses the world. It has learned how I drive and is occasionally in contact with other computers orbiting in space so that it knows precisely where on the planet it is. It literally is a thinking being. Now how is Juan the "grease monkey" supposed to deal with that?) One must choose to work in sub specialties and hope against hope that they remain profitable.
These days I consider myself to be a learned man not because I actually have all this knowledge stored in my head (although I do tend to answer in question form), but rather I have the knowledge of where the knowledge is stored, stored in my head.
Hey, I'm trying to get away with using a few pounds of lumpy, icky, gray, jelly-like stuff to understand the entire universe with, so cut me some slack.
Many people may be uncomfortable with the advances of science, and don't really understand or even believe it. To quell their unease they may
be turning to the supernatural to offer easy (but wrong) explanations.
I wonder if the distinction can be clearly drawn (much as Arthur C. Clark said) between science and the supernatural by many people. I'm in San Francisco writing this and you are where ever you happen to be, probably thousands of miles away, reading my thoughts. Not too different from what used to be called magic.
Science, in an ass backwards way, might actually foster supernatural beliefs. Several times on these threads people have happily stated (only to be flamed) the "science" and the bible complimented each other.
If science can split the atom, which is fundamentally invisible and release a tremendous amount of power then how big of s stretch is it to an invisible god with tremendous power?
Science must, for many people, make it seem as if any damn thing is possible.
Although we pride ourselves that it is the evolutionary development of an inordinate intelligence that separates us from the rest of the animals many are not too keen about it. Take the English suffix ard (art) as in coward, braggart, drunkard and sluggard. Taken here it means an attribute that is carried to such an access as to be annoying to the general population. The word Wizard is in this group, meaning a person who is too intelligent to be allowed out in mixed company. Since this is a word that dates back to the "Dark Ages" when most of our science had been lost I would say that It's entirely possible that there always has been too much knowledge for the average person.
------------
Never Dr Praitorious! There are some things man was not meant to know.
|
|
|
|
Mespo_man
Skeptic Friend
USA
312 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2001 : 14:54:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I really never understood the true believers, but I really feel for them in that they are so very, very wrong about so very, very much.
...and they feel for you, ljbrs, because you are so very, very certain about so very, very little.
Ignorance is bliss. I'm fortunate(?) to live in an Amish neighborhood in Northeastern Ohio. What the Amish DON'T know would fill many volumes of blank (HA  ) pages. But what they DO know sustains them, nourishes them and comforts them. Do I feel sorry for them? Heck no. Do they feel sorry for me? Heck no. Makes for an interesting relationship.
(:raig |
|
|
|
The Bad Astronomer
Skeptic Friend
137 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2001 : 14:57:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
"Even Einstein put his foot in it sometimes"
Einstein seemed to be right about Lambda and dark energy (a/k/a Quintessence), because his ideas are now coming into their own with the discovery by astrophysicists and cosmologists in the 1990s of the accelerating universe.
He may have been right, but for entirely the wrong reason. He put lambda into his equation because he thought the Universe was static, neither expanding nor contracting. It was after Hubble's discovery of the expanding Universe that Einstein realized he didn't need to have lambda to keep the Universe from collapsing. Having lambda in there doesn't necessarily change anything (you can set it to 0) but the idea of having it in there was done for the wrong reason.
*****
The Bad Astronomer
badastro@badastronomy.com
http://www.badastronomy.com
|
|
|
|
Orpheus
Skeptic Friend
92 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2001 : 10:10:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
[b] Many people may be uncomfortable with the advances of science, and don't really understand or even believe it.
Fully agree. I find that many mystics I converse with are not so much close-minded to the views of science, but rather very poorly acquainted with some of its basic methods and findings. They are not familiar with the usage of basic concepts such as "theory", "probability", natural "laws" etc.
One, for instance, recently told me that evolution theory has been "refuted" due to unreliable carbon-dating methods and the inexplicability of sentience having evolved from non-sentient matter!
This probably causes them to often confuse their method of the unseen with that of scientists who work with difficult-to-observe phenomena.
Cudos to Slater for an excellent posting!!
Find your own damned answers! |
|
|
|
Dog_Ed
Skeptic Friend
USA
126 Posts |
Posted - 07/29/2001 : 15:43:26 [Permalink]
|
Just a quick note on my signature ("Even Einstein put his foot in it sometimes"): I just mean that everyone, even Science Saints, are fallible. Einstein argued against the fundamental uncertainty of quantum mechanics but all the evidence to date shows his position was incorrect.
Yeah, nice posting, Slater. Modern communication technology means that an inquisitive human can at least get an overview of a very wide range of fields more quickly than ever before. If one can intelligently discuss physics, plate tectonics, and comparative religions, then one has a much better chance of sorting out a realistic world view. In my humble opinion.
"Even Einstein put his foot in it sometimes" |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
