Is a scientific lifestyle even possible?

Comments

• jeffw@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  What?

  source

  • dope@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Woof

    source

    • user224@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Meow?

      source
• photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  What do you mean by scientific Sidestyle? Can you try to rephrase your question?

  source
• nodsocket@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  All science is based on observations whose veracity can’t be completely proven. You may be a brain in a vat and all your life experiences are illusions. All you can do is make sense of the world with respect to your observations and have faith that it is an accurate representation of reality.

  Science is still better than religion of guessing because in science you are looking for logical consistency. Even if your worldview is false, at least it will be in accordance with itself.

  source

  • dope@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    That’s nice, but how about my question?

    source

    • ken_cleanairsystems@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Your question is really vague; I think that’s one reason people are having a hard time answering. What do you mean by “lifestyle”? Can you give some specific examples of areas or ways in which you want to apply science to your everyday life?

      source
  • dope@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Are we saying that science fails at scale?

    source

    • HerbalGamer@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Why would it?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• ryathal@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Scientific lifestyle as in independent verification of everything? No that’s impossible, scientists can’t even do that in their fields. Society requires trust to function.

  source

  • dope@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    So call it “scientific authoritarianism”?

    source

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      If you really want to view it that way, but it’s more about trust structures than outright authoritarianism. It’s not blindly believing the “science authority” it’s having oversight bodies and watch dog organizations to call out when things don’t smell right.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Nibodhika@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Yes, it is. Me and most people on the planet live a scientific lifestyle, the last time humans didn’t was known as the dark ages. Don’t believe me? Then why haven’t you jumped in front of a train or exiting skyscrapers through the window? The reason is the enormous amount of scientific evidence that tells you otherwise, and no matter how much unscientific people think they are they still follow th scientific method every day for all facets of their life without noticing, they just decide that this or that does not need the same amount of scrutiny that they put on their ability to survive a 100m fall.

  source

  • dope@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    But the vast majority of us don’t “follow the scientific method”. But we do is place our trust in scientific authority. That’s quite a different thing.

    source

    • Nibodhika@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      So do you think you don’t have enough evidence that jumping out of a skyscraper will kill you? Do you need to conduce experiments by yourself? Or do you trust on the scientific authorities for this?.

      If you trust them for this, why not trust them for other things? And if you don’t why not jump of a skyscraper?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      So should we conduct our own experiment as to whether getting hit by a train is in fact fatal?

      source
• MrJameGumb@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Why would anyone want to test everything? That seems like a huge waste of time

  source

  • dope@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Yes, how silly that would be.

    source

    • MrJameGumb@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      What a remarkably helpful answer 🙄

      source
• Kolanaki@yiffit.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Just have a little faith.

  source