• 0 Posts
  • 215 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 6th, 2023

help-circle

  • bastion@feddit.nltoScience Memes@mander.xyzEvidence
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    Your options are “grow” or “repeat”. Unfortunately, you’re the one most equipped to take responsibility for your own life, but you evolved into this situation, and evolution is messy. It’s not your fault, bit it’s your responsibility.

    Accepting those things deeply enough, and what they mean personally, changes everything.


  • bastion@feddit.nltoScience Memes@mander.xyzEvidence
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    I’m glad there’s someone else out there with the same concerns.

    I’d be more glad if unknowns and inconsistencies were frankly acknowledged. Even though in some senses Feynman contributed to the metaphorical tech debt, one of the things I love about his lectures is his frankness in regard to the (then) current state of knowledge, and about how much was simply unknown. Much of that is still unknown, and there are major glaring inconsistencies that are handwaved into oblivion.

    To be clear, this is not an “anti-science” comment, but rather a desire to see the institution of science become more consistent, and to address unknowns honestly.














  • This. The institution of science is deeply biased towards the established knowledge base - partly due to monetary interests, partly due to ‘simple’ social inertia, like when someone doesn’t want some kid to come up with ideas that may invalidate things they have seen to (seem to) work.

    Like with magnetohydrodynamics - it’s useful for modeling some things, but depends on the notion that space (as in, the interplanetary and interstellar medium) is either nonconductive or infinitely conductive - which simply isn’t the case.

    Plasma cosmologists have made some really nutty assertions. However, ideas should be treated on their merit - and some of what they theorize has a lot of solidity. But in general, it’s treated with derision, because (admittedly) it also traffics in unicorns.

    If someone who purports to traffic in unicorns also traffics in the Principia Mathematica, it doesn’t invalidate the latter.




  • It was three distinct points. But it wouldn’t matter if I did reason it out for you - your stance is emotive, and you won’t agree with me unless that viewpoint underlying your stance changes, and it won’t change due to someone reasoning it out for you.

    The slow grind of time, and the steady erosion by nature may cause you to change, though. Fortunately, whether it does or not, it’s basically irrelevant to me whether or not you believe or act as I do.

    Edit, in response to your edit:

    You sure do assume a lot about me. But, so it goes. Again - I’m not really concerned with whether you think like I do or not. You can even hate me if you like. I don’t expect you to come to my viewpoint by anything I say. My viewpoint is different than yours, and that suits me fine. Such is diversity.


  • Nature will undoubtedly provide a grisly and cruel death. Animals don’t have a concept of “long, well-lived life full of meaning.” They do have a direct experience of “having food and shelter and being generally free of pain is enjoyable.”

    It doesn’t matter if it’s in their prime (before they decline and life becomes difficult) or of it’s after their prime - except that if you wait too long, life starts to suck pretty bad.

    If you want to end predation, you’ll have an eternal task on your hands.