- Joined
- Dec 22, 2020
'The Science' in this sense is more of a media construct, where you can package something as 'The Science' and then sell it to the masses. It's similar to how religious and political organisations promote dogmas or slogans in a pre-packaged form that can then be regurgitated by the populace. People are often influenced more by the media, emotional manipulation, and advertising, than the somewhat dry and often ambiguous findings of scientific practice. The 'I LOVE SCIENCE' types are also slightly quizzical in their conviction that the fundamental topic at issue in political discourse is whether people love 'SCIENCE,' rather than people typically not being enthusiastic about looking into 'science' beyond what is preached to them by establishment and mainstream sources such as the media and government.The issue isn't Enlightenment era "Science will lead us to make more rational decisions" philosophies, the issue has been
A) The take over of "I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE" types who only at best like 'popular science' which is often what you see in the media and is often wrong, based on piss poor papers, sensationalized, and/or, wrongly interpreted by 'journalists'. Think "Doing x will increase (or double) your chances of cancer!" when the actual study says it will increase it from a .00001% to .00002%.
B) People in A who treat science as a religion ("BELIEVE THE SCIENCE!" even when its highly disputed).
Of course, the leftist hatred of 'mansplaining' and things that are 'offensive' means that, no matter how much they 'LOVE SCIENCE,' they are only open to considering a very limited spectrum of science that does not risk offending their sensibilities.