Science Musings Discussion
Thank you Chet, I think you've done a better job than I did at making my point. For example, "When science moves away from consensus, as in Lysenko's Soviet Union or creationist America, mischief results." Well, Lysenko was not an example of consensus, he was an example of pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo mandated by fiat.
And what if we all had to eat only French cuisine? Perish the thought...
Consensus is most effective when it arises out of any number of contending ideas. Some of these ideas may appear distasteful or controversial. But if consensus arises without rigor or at least looking at divergent points of view, neither knowledge nor wisdom are advanced.
'A certain amount of "one-size-fits-all" has been good for the world, especially when that "one-size" is a notion of our shared humanity.' Truely. Our shard humanity encompasses a lot of contradictions though as the witch hunts etc. that you mention so clearly show. Defeating these various evils that arise in monolithic realms of certaintity are likely to require many approaches - perhaps even including some ideas that disturb the anti-theistic (as opposed to the atheistic).
Whenever I see the word "only" and especially when I see it repeated, my "certaintity alert" radar lights up. "Rational doubt", my pet phrase to substitute for disenchantment, is aroused whenever such certainty steals into a thoughtful discussion. Even when I'm certain that certaintity is a lousy idea!
Lastly, I don't visit to you site often enough, but keep it up!
Chet and Dave, I had an embarrassing experience with a Los Alamos colleague, years ago. I said “Walter, your last name is spelled exactly like the last name of that nutcase-idiot-Russian geneticist, Trofim Lysenko.” Says Walter, “It’s no wonder, he’s my uncle” (Trofim was still alive at the time). Oops, it’s a small world!
Commenting by HaloScan
