Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CrystalSong
I've been talking with a scientist this week and he's been going on and on about placebo effect, control groups, reproducible effects and rigid scientific testing and blah blah blah.
Like something isn't really until it successfully jumps through all of scientists little flaming hoops.
Bah!
Science annoys me in this moment - it seeks to strip the Mystery from all things. "Name it to tame it."
Science is my country's current Go-to-God. Little prop-up gods full of chest thumping.
There, got that off my chest. :)
|
So here's what science does. Because we humans are subject to fantastical thinking (see: religion, the "new-age speculations" and culturally ingrained assumptions) science attempts to address this through standards that are more tactically driven in the hopes of gaining a less filtered stream of observations over individualized issues. I'll give them points for this. This doesn't mean you have to then buy the process as the only way to be thinking. They're guessing as well, only doing so in the hopes of mitigating some of the pollution that often comes with human speculation. We can still draw from their insights, in an open-ended appreciation of information as it emerges from whatever source. Any information that's weighty will not only fail to tame that which is being observed but will instead create more questions that answers. So a "conclusion" that is derived in this, and in any other way, will only serve as a brief stop along the pathway to more complexly that, if absorbed openly, should effectively suggest more complexity still. Not only is this the pathway to further appreciations but should also leave us ever more humble for the exposure. We really haven't a clue as to what's going on within nature and why we do what we do. We only have approximations.. absolute-honesty requires that we keep this in mind. :)