|
yeah


Registered: 02/08/09
Posts: 3,729
Last seen: 2 months, 27 days
|
Is science too political?
#25483016 - 09/23/18 01:08 PM (5 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I've heard that anyone who presents controversial ideas is at best shunned and at worst crucified (see Jacques Benveniste).
Is this true?
There's a guy named Gerald Pollack who primarily studies water. He's who I first heard suggest this notion.
He helped found The institute for Venture Science which seeks to promote innovation and unconventional ideas.
https://ivscience.org/
--------------------
|
One Eye mike
Old Man

Registered: 08/27/18
Posts: 38
Last seen: 5 years, 3 months
|
Re: Is science too political? [Re: yeah]
#25483081 - 09/23/18 01:38 PM (5 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
A lot of scientific studies are funded by private money. I would think those funding have some agenda in their thought process. Government funding = politics. Unfortunately researchers would like to do real science but they still need that money from outside sources.
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,886
|
Re: Is science too political? [Re: yeah]
#25483084 - 09/23/18 01:39 PM (5 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Institutional science is extremely, almost absurdly, political. Everyone is angling for fame, the big breakthrough that will make them well known and amply financed. Also, everyone within a field wants to be the first to a discovery. Getting beaten is called being "scooped," and having this happen hurts reputations. Also, as you point out, only kosher areas of research are respected. For being such smart people, most scientists have extremely closed minds. Scientists frequently behave as stupidly and in as petty a way as anyone else.
It's disappointing and ridiculous.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,729
|
Re: Is science too political? [Re: yeah]
#25484406 - 09/24/18 03:59 AM (5 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
yeah said: I've heard that anyone who presents controversial ideas is at best shunned and at worst crucified (see Jacques Benveniste).
Is this true?
Not necessarily, but since scientists are humans, their behavior mirrors that of any group of humans. Hence, there is your usual occurrence of group think, conservatism and opportunistic behavior among scientists. Does this make all of science 'political'? I wouldn't say so. Yes, 'political' motives play a role in various parts of the scientific process, but it's as easy to overstate the role of politics as it is to ignore it.
For example, in the case of radically new ideas, you have to keep in mind that there are two main reasons why those ideas would be rejected by some (or even many) in a certain field. The first reason is, as said, politics: people fearing that the new concepts will somehow erode their personal status and recognition in a field, making it harder for them to obtain funding, social status etc. The second reason is more in-depth and less political and has to do with the mechanisms surrounding conservatism. If someone comes up with a radically new idea that potentially changes the way we currently understand a topic to a large extent, there will initially be a fair share of criticism that goes along the lines of "you're rejecting what we know; how likely is it that you are right and all of us are wrong, and what is the basis for your claims?" While the first motive evidently hinders scientific progress in an unproductive way, the second motive has a defensible role in the academic debate: it prevents conjecture from being too easily accepted as fact and ensures that new knowledge is thoroughly validated before it is widely accepted. Of course, there must be an opportunity for bringers of radically new ideas to engage in this process of claim substantiation, and this is where a big dilemma rises: it is generally difficult to gain access to funds for large-scale studies on theories that are nascent and controversial. This is particularly true for newcomers to an established discipline.
I find it difficult (impossible) to say if science is 'too political' - it varies too much from discipline to discipline, research group to research group, individual to individual, etc. Moreover, political and scientific considerations both play a role in shaping resistance to radically new ideas, and it would be too easy to state that this resistance is always purely politically motivated and unjust.
The topic is very complex and reducing it to being 'too political' is unlikely, in my opinion, to lead to a good understanding of the many processes that influence how academic knowledge is created and disseminated.
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,379
|
Re: Is science too political? [Re: yeah]
#25484664 - 09/24/18 08:37 AM (5 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I don't think its too political. If you can perform a reproducible study, with a sound hypothesis you'll get published. The funding situation is a bit different, however, I'm of the opinion that grantsmanship and knowing how to present a hypothesis and study proposal can get around those barriers.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Mikect05
Stranger

Registered: 11/03/17
Posts: 62
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
|
Re: Is science too political? [Re: badchad]
#25489299 - 09/25/18 10:07 PM (5 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
There is a podcast that is called "Herbalism as Activism" there is one episode that really gets to the heart of this, I highly recommend it.
But yes indeed science is way too political imo. Everything is warped by greed, consumerism, money wins all wars machine.
How can science or anything else be spared? The global system is based on currency. There is nothing fair about it, hard work, intelligence, they are such small factors in who wins the game. People who lie, cheat, steal and manipulate have the advantage. Others who refuse to compromise values are at a disadvantage. Those who have the advantage have a greater influence on the "System" as a whole, and so they continue to allow the bending of the rules in ways it suits them.
Don't misunderstand me, government is NOT the problem. It is nothing more than a tool that can be used for good or malice.
But yea, why should science be immune to the corruption?
|
pineninja
Dream Weaver



Registered: 08/17/14
Posts: 12,469
Loc: South
|
Re: Is science too political? [Re: Mikect05]
#25489368 - 09/25/18 10:43 PM (5 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Buying tickets in a lottery in which no one's yet won. Odds so far impossible, must just be for fun. Toiling away looking for a unified truth. Twisting tales to make blush, sophisticated sleuth.
Noble as it is and as crucial as it may seem. The most we can do is skim of the cream. At the points of conjecture and pure theory. Peer review reinforces and can't be wrong clearly.
The odds have been stacked and much like religion. With no proven standard they can decree difference as fiction. I to am sick of the righteous scientist. Who mostly get their new ideas from some corrupt journal list.
Just like anything else.
-------------------- Just a fool on the hill.
|
mndfreeze 
Shroomery Secret Service




Registered: 04/22/02
Posts: 20,553
Loc: PuppetMasterFlash
Last seen: 1 hour, 10 minutes
|
Re: Is science too political? [Re: pineninja]
#25492168 - 09/27/18 05:27 AM (5 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Politics are part of being human. It's a manifestation of our ideals and beliefs mixed in with biological drivers. It's not possible to have something completely free of politics unless humans are somehow not even involved.
The scientific methods themselves are good and devoid of politics however once you get to the application of them, decisions about which get funded, which do not, which are purposely obscured vs blasted across the media it becomes impossible for politics to not be involved in some way, shape or form. This, IMO, has both good and bad results. Science in itself is devoid of morals for example and we put out own morals in place to keep people from doing possibly atrocious things in the name of discovery. The general populaces moral compass usually relates to the political climate as people usually form governments that mostly align with their beliefs. Mostly, anyway. Science and politics are both just tools. Humans are the ones that create the flaws and failures.
-------------------- Nothing says love like grannies prolapsed anus! quote]Urb said: I know... Its fucked up... Ill fix it minyana..[/quote]
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,729
|
Re: Is science too political? [Re: mndfreeze]
#25492307 - 09/27/18 07:10 AM (5 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Science in itself is devoid of morals for example
This is only the case within certain philosophical frameworks. If you take critical research for example, morals/ethics and power are central to the approach.
|
Necropolis
Undercover Traffic Cop

Registered: 09/13/18
Posts: 438
Last seen: 5 years, 6 months
|
Re: Is science too political? [Re: koraks]
#25492627 - 09/27/18 09:51 AM (5 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Naah, there's nothing political about national security secrets and global cover-ups of scientific research.
|
yeah


Registered: 02/08/09
Posts: 3,729
Last seen: 2 months, 27 days
|
Re: Is science too political? [Re: yeah]
#25495722 - 09/28/18 01:02 PM (5 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
|
|