• 20hzservers@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    This guy’s a nut job his whole argument is that 100% truth cannot be known while admitting that science is a great tool for knowing 99% of the truth he’s actually proud of being 1% correct. 😅

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah, Newtonian gravity is 99% correct. It’s extremely useful most of the time, but it’s wrong. Forgetting that fact is a slippery slope to more damaging assumptions.

      • 20hzservers@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Bro, theories are rarely proven “wrong” it’s more that they are built upon when studies come along that shed more light on a specific phenomenon. It’s better to say that science tries to become more correct than to say it is proven wrong. I’m open to new empirical evidence changing my view but you only have your annecdotal story to back up your claims. I’m not forgetting that fact you are.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          It’s better to say that science tries to become more correct than to say it is proven wrong.

          Exactly, or proven right. Science is the process of developing models which more closely approximate the world we see. It’s a fantastic tool for doing that, and the best tool we have for improving knowledge overall. But it cannot support absolute declarations. There is always the possibility that a future theory shows inadequacies in the present one.

          People like you seem to think that our present theories are fundamentally special, that we’ve reached the pinnacle of knowledge. What’s the difference between you, and the highly educated scientists over the centuries who laughed at far-fetched theories that we use today?

          Do I think astrology is a particularly useful or accurate model? No, not really. But once you start down the path of absolutism it slithers bit by bit into more and more uncertain topics. It’s a troubling trend that turns otherwise intelligent people into fundamentalists.

          Acknowledging the potential of a theory I don’t personally believe is a small price to pay for mental hygiene.