How much of modern science is bullshit?

[XYZpdq]

To be fair the media does sensationalize when they report studies as they do with everything else they report.

This is very important.
"Science" the all-knowing god of knowledge and wisdom that the media cites is usually random shit studies from nobody groups that sounds interesting and fills the allotted time. It has nothing to do with any real thing.

 

[melty]

I don't know about the others but Psychology is really bullshit. It's frustrating because MRAs and SJWs really latch onto it, then again I guess everyone does. I mean look at this study, I just picked one from the replication project at random, how can you read that and not think it's total bullshit?

 

[autisticdragonkin]

I don't know about the others but Psychology is really bullshit. It's frustrating because MRAs and SJWs really latch onto it, then again I guess everyone does. I mean look at this study, I just picked one from the replication project at random, how can you read that and not think it's total bullshit?

I would say that calling the entire discipline bullshit is a little excessive. The proper thing to say is that most research has little validity (possibly due to research ethics)

 

[The Knife's Husbando]

One thing everyone needs to remember is that ALL SCIENCES ARE DYNAMIC. That's the point. As new information is discovered & proven through research, theories and laws change. Take psychiatry for instance. We once thought lobotomies were a good idea, and pure lead was an "ideal" material for water pipes. At one time "the four humors" was about all medicine had. Now we have 3-d printed neurally-controlled prosthetic arms. Artificial hearts have been a proven technology for decades. We landed a robot on Mars.

Yes, you do have to separate the gold from the dross. But science and reasoning are the core reason we're where we are as a species.

 

[Dudeofteenage]

The beautiful thing about science is that it can be wrong without it being "bullshit". It's built into the meta-assumptions that at least some of the things that are widely held to be true will be disproved in the future, but that doesn't discredit the practice.

 

[DNJACK]

Science have no coherency.

At least one of the three most proven theorems has to be false according to the two others. We don't know which it is.
No one really cares.

It is a wonderful life philosophy.

 

[autisticdragonkin]

Science is just learning about the world by looking at it. Anyone who says differently is either trying to sell you something or trick you into stupidity

 

[DuskEngine]

The beautiful thing about science is that it can be wrong without it being "bullshit". It's built into the meta-assumptions that at least some of the things that are widely held to be true will be disproved in the future, but that doesn't discredit the practice.

Yeah I expect even widely accepted theories to be proven "wrong" at some point. Wittgenstein's ladder is useful to keep in mind here.

Science isn't the process of reading the writing on some cosmic wall. It's the process of hammering a model into fitting your data better than it did before.

 

[QI 541]

One thing everyone needs to remember is that ALL SCIENCES ARE DYNAMIC. That's the point. As new information is discovered & proven through research, theories and laws change.

Theories can change, but the laws of the universe don't. If you're actually getting different results from the same experiments, there's something wrong.

Of course, social studies is a bit different so I'm not sure how they should deal with it.

 

[DNJACK]

It has actually been proven that the laws of physics change slowly with time.

 

[autisticdragonkin]

Theories can change, but the laws of the universe don't. If you're actually getting different results from the same experiments, there's something wrong.

Of course, social studies is a bit different so I'm not sure how they should deal with it.

If you are getting different results from the same experiments then it is just simply probability or you aren't actually performing the same experiments

 

[The Knife's Husbando]

Theories can change, but the laws of the universe don't. If you're actually getting different results from the same experiments, there's something wrong.

Of course, social studies is a bit different so I'm not sure how they should deal with it.

If you are getting different results from the same experiments then it is just simply probability or you aren't actually performing the same experiments

I should of said that clearer. What I'm talking about is that our understanding of the universe changes as more information is uncovered by new research. Science isn't a static thing. Our knowledge of a branch science is never "finished" or "done" and neatly put away on a shelf.