this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
56 points (93.8% liked)

Asklemmy

43846 readers
675 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago (18 children)
  1. Your right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins (metaphorically speaking)

  2. "Facts" and "Beliefs" do not share equal weight in ANY policy discourse.

  3. Whatever your religious beliefs (and you are welcome to them) stays at home when you are doing business or in any other way interacting with the public.

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (17 children)

good luck defining where facts end and beliefs begin. ultimately science is a belief, even if it is evidence-based

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

Which makes it a fact? Facts can change too

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

can you elaborate? I'm not sure what your point is

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The difference is that one belief is evidence-based, and hence a fact, while the other isn't

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

but to people with faith, their faith is evidence-based

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Faith and belief isn't the same thing, no? Faith is something you have regardless of evidence.

Anyway, the difference between them are that one is evidence-based on a scientific ground, which should be the only valid evidence, while the other isn't.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

yes but you still have to have faith in the ability of another person to do science and not falsify evidence

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's why science is peer reviewed and a different matter. You can also potentially fact check it yourself. But this is digressing from the point

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

but you can't! are you personally able to verify the results of every scientific investigation ever performed? think about what's currently happening in psychology. loads of old foundational studies have been found to be irreproducible. and yet people had faith that they were conducted honestly and appropriately

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well yes, you could? That's why science gets peer reviewed. If it's not something that can be reproduced it won't pass. And psychology is difficult since there's so many factors that can change, which brings back my earlier point, facts can change. :)

Plate tectonics wasn't discovered until recently so before the 60's, it was a fact that continents didn't move. Then it was discovered that they do actually move, and now it's a fact that they do.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

not within your lifetime though. you just have to have faith in the peer review process. also peer reviewing typically does not involve actually reproducing the results

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)