/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10717969]

/sci/ absolutely BTFO

[Anonymous No.10717976]

>>10717969
I suppose, if /sci/ are merely fans of science, and never apply actual scientific reasoning themselves.

[Anonymous No.10717978]

normal people are kind of retarded for trusting science to be honest. I mean they have no concept of what it is or means and just trust it objectively. other scientists don't even do this. that is why contention exists.

[Anonymous No.10717986]

>>10717978
>normal people are kind of retarded for trusting science to be honest.
Why? They constantly see the results of modern science (medicine, electronics, automobiles, etc) so it's natural to 'trust' science

[Anonymous No.10717988]

>>10717969
>science is the only way to true
Good thing no successful scientist thinks this

[Anonymous No.10718005]

>>10717978
>normal people are kind of retarded for trusting science
>they're also retarded for rejecting science
>can't win
>>10717969
Yes OP scientism is stupid.
Don't know what fraction of /sci/ supports it though.

[Anonymous No.10718008]

>>10718005
>black and white thinking
>can't win
Got that right.

[Anonymous No.10718067]

>>10717978
hey it works, nothing else seems to produce any results so hey whatever dude

[Anonymous No.10718080]

>>10718005
There's know such thing as "scientism"

[Anonymous No.10718107]

>>10717969
>Strawman BTFO in a comic


Shit Thread

[Anonymous No.10718109]

>>10718005
Scientism isn’t real. Creationist boomers made it up.

[Anonymous No.10718207]

the world health organization said being a tranny isn't a mental illness and considering trannys cut off their dicks i would have to say they're lying or there is a serious flaw in the scientific method

[Anonymous No.10718239]

>>10718207
The World Health Organization is a political organization, not a scientific one.

[Anonymous No.10718381]

>>10718207
The classification of something as a mental illness is highly irrelevant to actual psychiatric practice. It has long been stablished that right now the best course of "treatment" or whatever bs term people want to call it is transition. Yes, trannies aren't "cured" and they still ktm much more often, but statistically it is proven that transition is the best way to reduce those numbers.

[Anonymous No.10718382]

>>10718381
>the best way to reduce those numbers
What else was tried and where is this study? I've obviously never been linked it, only the other ones.

[Anonymous No.10718418]

>>10718382
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5944396/&ved=2ahUKEwjgybqCzuPiAhVFjK0KHaMWBjQQFjABegQIBxAQ&usg=AOvVaw3TitRLoLYEwNKk_amqqRvv&cshid=1560331317661 it's not an easy topic.

[Anonymous No.10718434]

>>10718418
>not an easy topic
All topics are easy. Consider everyone incompetent until evidence can be presented to the contrary. I never accept a source unless that source puts its ignorance forward.

In this case, they're already outlawing possible treatment options, so obviously it's not a stable system that it makes sense to run a study over.

My personal opinion is that we don't have the technology necessary to perform genome manipulation and are giving false hope to people searching for a magical method of transition. Plastic surgery isn't an answer to any question I've ever considered, and certainly does not correlate positively with health. What I was really looking for was an article that discusses actual statistics, and is aware of sampling bias resulting from early overpoliticization of treatment options. I found evidence for overpoliticization, but as far as any method of determining competent study of all treatment options, I'm not prepared to accept the anecdotal (professional) experience of a handful of psychiatrists.

False hope is a very damaging thing, and anyone working in a medical position will have a hard time avoiding complicity with that bias. I have no reason to advocate plastic surgery for any purpose. Failing to search for alternatives is not an acceptable answer to me with the (small bit of) evidence I've reviewed thus far.

[Anonymous No.10718518]

>>10717969
>pic
Yes, it is called, "Empirical Evidence." Now, go skub somwhere else, spam bot.

[Anonymous No.10718545]

>caring about pointless philosophical concepts such as "truth"

[Anonymous No.10718555]

>>10718080
>know
You did that on purpose.

[Anonymous No.10718988]

>>10717969
>truth
not science

[Anonymous No.10719052]

>>10717986
>They constantly see the results of modern science
They constantly see the assumed results of science

[Anonymous No.10719055]

>>10719052
what did he mean by this

[Anonymous No.10719056]

>>10717969

[Anonymous No.10719649]

>>10717969

[Anonymous No.10719669]

>>10717969
Only reddit thinks that way. /sci/ knows that mathematics is the only way to certain truth. Science is just an ad hoc first order Taylor series approximation of the truth.

[Anonymous No.10719700]

>>10717969
If the answer is "yes", there is no contradiction.

[Anonymous No.10719899]

>>10719055
It could all be magic and most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

[Anonymous No.10719916]

>>10719669
This, tbqfbh.

[Anonymous No.10719933]

>>10719899
If magic produced all the results modern science has I would absolutely believe in magic

[Anonymous No.10719965]

>>10718545
This guy gets it

[Anonymous No.10719995]

>>10717969
Science os the only way one could conceivably know truth. It may also ultimately prove futile, but everything else already has.

[Anonymous No.10720076]

>>10719933
I subscribe to the philosophy of morphic resonance. I believe that nature in its natural state is under no obligation to make sense, and can only be said to experience temporary arrangements. When we study nature through science, we're not "discovering" things about nature so much as inventing an idea and "asking" it to remain consistent so long as we measure that idea. I believe detectors create reality fields, that humans invented sensors with the first sun dial. In other words, time doesn't exist except as that we imprint it on the world around us through the human mind. It is our latent desire to control the forces of nature.

We first had to assume such forces exist. They only do as a result of our collective imagination. This is why so many "mystics" today subscribe to some form of co-authorship mechanism for manifestation of reality; on some level we know that all these particles and physics and so on are just us trying to live inside an alchemical shell of our own construction.

I guess, to you, it'll look like a convenient excuse, but I literally believe the first step of the scientific method embeds intent/magic.

[Anonymous No.10720090]

>>10719933
If magic gave useful results and was reproducible in controlled situations it wouldn't be magic, it would just be a branch of physics. See: electricity

[Anonymous No.10720261]

Put your trust in the bible guys. The men who wrote it were divinely inspired. We know because the wrote that they were.

[Anonymous No.10720266]

>>10720090
No it would be a branch of science. Physics holds no monopoly here.