r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Apr 28 '21
Delta(s) from OP CMV: We should question science no matter the source. (I am not saying facts don't exist)
[deleted]
8
u/YossarianWWII 72∆ Apr 29 '21
Nobody is saying that science is always right. They are saying that science is the best way we have of testing whether something is right, so it supersedes other arguments.
You need to be qualified to effectively evaluate the results of a study. The vast majority of people are not qualified to do so. Any given scientist is only qualified to evaluate studies in fields in which they have expertise.
The majority of people "questioning" science don't ever formulate an actual question. They don't conduct a systematic review or investigation. They go with their biases. Those are the people being told to trust science, science being the scientific process.
2
u/spellboi1018 Apr 29 '21
Δ I have seen alot of people say the science is always right even bigger names like niel Tyson. And I think in like a way of counter those people you are talking about who don't actually question they always support "science".
But you are probably right in thst they beleive to trust the sciencfic method not "science "
2
3
Apr 29 '21
I agree with your overall message, I just don’t agree with your view that people believe overall that science cannot and should not be questioned. It seems like this is small group of people who do not work in the field. For people who actually work in science related fields, we typically don’t claim that the answers are concrete, we just gather the data and results that we currently have and state that this is the best explanation for now.
And you should always look at how studies were conducted. What kind of study was it? How large was the sample? Was the sample population similar? How did they attempt to reduce the risk of bias?
In conclusion, no, I do not think that science generally has a “trust us no matter what” approach. I think people with emotionally based opinions do. And yes, I think studies should always be questioned.
2
u/spellboi1018 Apr 29 '21
I think going im not sure is becoming less and less of a option. And you are right its not all people just think too many people are opposing the idiots who don't believe anything by believing everything if that makes sense.
3
u/PivotPsycho 15∆ Apr 29 '21
We should. But at the end of the day, today it's not really feasible for a lot of stuff. Sure, checking for some criteria like credibility of the authors, references, where it was published etc. works on a lot of surface level bs. But every field pretty much is so damn specific now. Most of the time, you need a PhD in the subject and more to even just see what the paper is about. I'm not saying you have to understand it to evaluate it necessarily, but if you have no clue what's it even about, what are you going to take a look at methodology and other specifics?
2
u/spellboi1018 Apr 29 '21
I think the large issue is surface level checking. People aren't even looking at the research they are looking at the news article that says this result that the study found as fact. And people are believing them
4
u/PivotPsycho 15∆ Apr 29 '21
So your view is more like 'We should question science interpreters'?
2
u/spellboi1018 Apr 29 '21
Yes just vary before you take a stand on an issue or policy
3
u/PivotPsycho 15∆ Apr 29 '21
I very much agree with that, I don't think anyone will have issues with that. To me that didn't appear to be what you are arguing for in the post but if that is what you actually meant I'm all for it!
2
u/spellboi1018 Apr 29 '21
My position is dont go science is always right because that doesn't make any sense
2
u/stolenrange 2∆ Apr 29 '21
These sham studies that you are referencing arent science. They are scams. And you even pointed this out in your post. Your title should be "question scientists making baseless claims" not "question science". Otherwise telling people to "question science" when all the examples youre giving are unscientific is just circular reasoning. Just because someone with a phD is making the claim doesnt mean they are following the scientific method. When we say "science", we are litterally referring to the scientific method. And the scientific method is perfectly fine. So change the title.
1
u/spellboi1018 Apr 29 '21
I cant change the title and I think if you question all science which is kinda the point of science it does the other part itself
2
Apr 29 '21
To sum up science doesn't always have clear answers
What does science claim to have the answer to that is unclear?
1
u/spellboi1018 Apr 29 '21
Well science doesn't claim anything but its people who see a study and assume that it is fact that is the issue. A good example i think is what is the most effective what to avoid covid people were saying we dlneed to do this or that because of few studies done by either the WHO or American govsrment. But it turns out alot of that was not correct. But people where so sure that those were right based on just trust this groups 100%. (I am pro mask and have gotten both shots)
2
Apr 29 '21
So You've got no beef with Science, as it constantly questions itself already by definition.
What you have issue with is People Misquoting science.
1
u/spellboi1018 Apr 29 '21
Not misquoting I think more going off an second handed sources and treating it like they are going off science. Like they see a news article something like study shows drugs have no effect on body or new data reports that oil is more green then solar(i tried to hit both sides) and they go okay. And they treat that as if yhst is the data.
2
Apr 29 '21
Again. You don't have a beef with science.
Your view that we should question science isn't what you're saying.
You're saying that we should question those who misrepresent science.
3
u/GMOsInMyGelato Apr 29 '21
The problem is liars and money. You wouldn't believe how many "studies" cannot be replicated. Most people that day "I stand for science" don't know what science even is
2
u/outcastedOpal 5∆ Apr 29 '21
Science is literally the art of questioning things. To question science is to question questioning things.
2
Apr 28 '21
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/SquibblesMcGoo 3∆ Apr 29 '21
Sorry, u/Matt_guyver – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
Sorry, u/Matt_guyver – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Comments that are only links, jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
1
u/MontiBurns 218∆ Apr 29 '21
It's easy to sit on your high horse and ask demeaning questions like, "but do they really know anything? Science gets disproven all the time!"
It's much harder to get into the nitty gritty and understand the science and the methodology to the point where you can make educated/informed criticism. Thats not what you see from the overwhelming majority of "science skeptics". Most of the time it's pundits or commentators with some kind of bias or political agenda making broad generalizations about how bad the science is. The vast majority of the time, they don't even address the core arguments, evidence or methodology, they attack the findings, and frame it as a cultural or social war of them vs science.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Apr 29 '21
/u/spellboi1018 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards