Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Atla »

Instead of trying to explain why for example galaxies spin too fast, we should realize that galaxies are just bits of reified mathematics, just tools from our imagination.
True philosophy points to the Moon
Gertie
Posts: 2181
Joined: January 7th, 2015, 7:09 am

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Gertie »

Bruno - welcome!
Because it responds to human action and the way it works in itself is never exactly the same, there is always a slight difference, because everything that goes on in nature is a concrete fact.

A concrete fact is the fact taken not only in the logical relation that expresses it, but in all the accidents necessary for it to happen. It is precisely these accidents that the experiment isolates: the accidental element is removed and only the logical definition is left behind. In nature there is no such fact, only concrete facts. Imagine how many experiments humans have done since inventing this business. A large number, no doubt. But what is this set of experiments in the face of all concrete facts? It is zero. This means that the whole of what experimental science can know is nothing compared to real nature. And this real nature can be known in itself only by contemplative observation that accepts it in its entirety as a mysterious fact, which is what it really is. That is, the concrete reality taken in its total presence is a mystery, no doubt, and the totality of what science knows about nature is a bean, that does not say what nature is or does, but how it reacts to certain human questions and provocations.

I think there are obvious caveats to what our own subjective observations and resulting assumptions can tell us about the world - we are flawed, limited creatures 'designed' by evolution to be able to navigate the world in order to survive and reproduce, not see and understand everything with some 'God's-eye' pov. And the scientific method relies on tools like inter-subjective review and repeatability, predictability and falsification to try to make the best of the flawed and limited observational and cognitive toolkit nature gave us. Hence the language of science now tends to be of theories, models and accounts, which are always open to correction. That seems right to me. I'm not sure there's a better way. If there are anomalies, or ''accidents'', that reinforces the need for such caveats, but they are already there.


I'm not sure what your conclusion means -

Modern science was born with this childhood illness of subjectivism. It will be necessary to cure it of this, but it can only be cured by articulating the active and interrogative point of view with the contemplative attitude of accepting the concrete reality.

The ''contemplative attitude of accepting the concrete reality'' is surely no less subjective an activity?
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Steve3007 »

Gertie wrote:The ''contemplative attitude of accepting the concrete reality'' is surely no less subjective an activity?
I tried to have a guess at what that might be intended to mean. My guess was that it meant thinking about ontology. So, essentially, that would mean thinking that the best way to decide how many teeth a horse has is to sit and ponder it, rather than go look in a horse's mouth.

But until Bruno returns, it is just a guess.
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7092
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Sculptor1 »

Faustus5 wrote: July 16th, 2020, 11:37 am
Sculptor1 wrote: July 16th, 2020, 11:25 am They are speculations treated as real things.
I don't know of any serious, mainstream scientist who thinks any of those things are anything other than tentative proposals in need of further evidence and understanding. At least in the case of dark matter and dark energy, there is objectively something that requires an explanation, even if the ones being offered at the moment prove inadequate.
Then, if you think that, what is your objection here?
User avatar
Faustus5
Posts: 306
Joined: May 8th, 2020, 10:08 am

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Faustus5 »

Terrapin Station wrote: July 16th, 2020, 5:24 pm Yes. The better approach is acknowledging that we're simply talking about it instrumentally in terms of the mathematics and current theories we use. The better approach amounts to not taking the things we imagine to help make the mathematics and conventions more relatable (such as "dark matter"/"dark energy") to amount to a literal ontological reality.
That doesn't even resemble a solution of any kind. It's more like a word salad in response to the fact that our models are making wrong predictions. It doesn't help at all and doesn't even try.

(Mind you, we are both on the same page with our shared annoyance at mathematical realism making people mistake models and calculating tricks for objective, mind-independent realities. I just think your calling some of this stuff "nonsense" is bizarre and unsupportable. There might really be ontologically real dark energy or dark matter that could one day be experimentally verified. Or maybe we just need new models.)
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Terrapin Station »

Faustus5 wrote: July 17th, 2020, 9:07 am
Terrapin Station wrote: July 16th, 2020, 5:24 pm Yes. The better approach is acknowledging that we're simply talking about it instrumentally in terms of the mathematics and current theories we use. The better approach amounts to not taking the things we imagine to help make the mathematics and conventions more relatable (such as "dark matter"/"dark energy") to amount to a literal ontological reality.
That doesn't even resemble a solution of any kind. It's more like a word salad
What part do you not understand or do you not think is clear (for it to count as "word salad")? And if you had requirements for what you'd count as a solution why didn't you state them prior to asking?
User avatar
Faustus5
Posts: 306
Joined: May 8th, 2020, 10:08 am

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Faustus5 »

Terrapin Station wrote: July 17th, 2020, 9:23 am
That doesn't even resemble a solution of any kind. It's more like a word salad
What part do you not understand or do you not think is clear (for it to count as "word salad")? And if you had requirements for what you'd count as a solution why didn't you state them prior to asking?
[/quote]

Let me put it another way: early astronomers noticed that observed planetary motions did not match the predictions made by Newtonian physics models, so they proposed the existence of new, so far unobserved planets that would explain the discrepancies.

How is the proposal of dark energy or dark matter substantially different than that?
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Terrapin Station »

Faustus5 wrote: July 17th, 2020, 4:05 pm
What part do you not understand or do you not think is clear (for it to count as "word salad")? And if you had requirements for what you'd count as a solution why didn't you state them prior to asking?
Let me put it another way: early astronomers noticed that observed planetary motions did not match the predictions made by Newtonian physics models, so they proposed the existence of new, so far unobserved planets that would explain the discrepancies.

How is the proposal of dark energy or dark matter substantially different than that?
Aside from the fact that energy existing "on its own" is incoherent, it's not different than that, but it's also not different than the fact that many proposed retrograde motion, either. My solution is to be up front that this stuff stems from an instrumental approach. Just because retrograde motion is an instrumental solution to the data, that doesn't justify an ontological commitment to it.
User avatar
Faustus5
Posts: 306
Joined: May 8th, 2020, 10:08 am

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Faustus5 »

Terrapin Station wrote: July 17th, 2020, 7:30 pm Aside from the fact that energy existing "on its own" is incoherent. . .
Can you cite a mainstream physicist or cosmologist saying this, in their own words, and also document that this view is widespread?
Again, that doesn't even begin to be a "solution" to anything. It's at best a PR stunt. And what exactly do you mean by "instrumental" approach, as contrasted by some other, equally effective, approach that would substantially drive to different conclusions and methods?

Observations do not fit the models. The models need to change or we need to propose the existence of something out there that would explain what we observe. "Nonsense" should be a term reserved for genuine lapses in scientific practice, which is absolutely NOT what is happening with proposals involving dark energy or dark matter, even if history judges them as errors.
User avatar
Faustus5
Posts: 306
Joined: May 8th, 2020, 10:08 am

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Faustus5 »

Okay, I'm going to try again and be more careful with the formatting. Really wish this place had a post editing option.
Terrapin Station wrote: July 17th, 2020, 7:30 pm Aside from the fact that energy existing "on its own" is incoherent, it's not different than that. . .
Can you cite a mainstream physicist or cosmologist saying this, in their own words, and also document that this view is widespread?
Terrapin Station wrote: July 17th, 2020, 7:30 pmMy solution is to be up front that this stuff stems from an instrumental approach.
Again, that doesn't even begin to be a "solution" to anything. It's at best a PR stunt. And what exactly do you mean by "instrumental" approach, as contrasted by some other, equally effective, approach that would substantially drive to different conclusions and methods?

Observations do not fit the models. The models need to change or we need to propose the existence of something out there that would explain what we observe. "Nonsense" should be a term reserved for genuine lapses in scientific practice, which is absolutely NOT what is happening with proposals involving dark energy or dark matter, even if history judges them as errors.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Terrapin Station »

Faustus5 wrote: July 18th, 2020, 7:34 am Can you cite a mainstream physicist or cosmologist saying this, in their own words, and also document that this view is widespread?
It's certainly not a widespread view, which is entirely my point in this thread. I'm supporting aspects in which modern science tends to be "quackery."

Are there any mainstream physicists or cosmologists who say this? I don't know. I'd have to search for one. But it's completely irrelevant what anyone else says. I don't post as a journalist here. That's never what I'm doing here. And I'm certainly not about to suggest an argument from authority for anything.
Again, that doesn't even begin to be a "solution" to anything.
Yes, it is. It's a solution to not forwarding ontological garbage under a misunderstanding of what science is even doing (re instrumentalism).
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Atla »

Papus79 wrote: July 16th, 2020, 11:43 am With some things they're attempts to Bondo or duct tape models that have passed their sell-by date (particularly dark matter / dark energy seem to be this way).
And how do you know that? Maybe there really are forms of 'matter' in the universe we haven't been able to find yet (I would be very surprised if there wouldn't be any). Or maybe our current models simply contain errors, or are fundamentally wrong.

"Dark matter" and "dark energy" are simply short for "we don't know what is causing these measured anomalies". How is that quackery?
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
Faustus5
Posts: 306
Joined: May 8th, 2020, 10:08 am

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Faustus5 »

Terrapin Station wrote: July 18th, 2020, 8:51 am Are there any mainstream physicists or cosmologists who say this? I don't know. I'd have to search for one.
Well, one would have to wonder why you would bring up such a view in the first place if no one seems to hold it. :roll:
Terrapin Station wrote: July 18th, 2020, 8:51 am Yes, it is. It's a solution to not forwarding ontological garbage under a misunderstanding of what science is even doing (re instrumentalism).
No, a solution posits an explanation which tells us why there is a mismatch between models and reality. Your "solution" is akin to just switching one's perspective while looking at a Necker cube. The problem doesn't magically go away when you do that. At least that is how it seems to me with what detail you've provided.

My assumption is that, since we tend to agree on almost everything, were you to carefully spell out your beefs about instrumentalism, I'd probably nod my head. (I would post a lot more around here if you weren't a member; almost every time I want to respond to someone, you've usually done it already and said what I wanted to, only better. :D )

I just don't see how you draw a logical line from that subject to a place where an apparently uncontroversial proposal in cosmology turns out to be "nonsense". Wrong for reasons X, Y, and Z, sure. "Nonsense" = unnecessary hyperbole.
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7092
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Sculptor1 »

ERROR. Sorry my typing is for ****.

The periphery of science has always included specuation.

As long as the method holds true then there is nothing wrong with this specualtion since parts of it, shown to be effective, make the core of science as time passes, and as more, and more secure empirical knowledge bolsters certain ideas.

The mistake has always been confusing the specualtive statements as if they were on the same level as the more demonstrative and replicable statements.

That is usually the fault of "popular science" as so often cited from idiotic magazines of popular science on this an other forums.

The trick is to stay skeptical and make distinctions between good science and empty headed click bait.
User avatar
Papus79
Posts: 1798
Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm

Re: Modern Science is quackery; here is why

Post by Papus79 »

Atla wrote: July 19th, 2020, 5:38 am And how do you know that? Maybe there really are forms of 'matter' in the universe we haven't been able to find yet (I would be very surprised if there wouldn't be any). Or maybe our current models simply contain errors, or are fundamentally wrong.

"Dark matter" and "dark energy" are simply short for "we don't know what is causing these measured anomalies". How is that quackery?
It's only quackery if someone wants to tell us that we're almost at the end of physics and we just need to physically get our hands on dark matter, dark energy, etc. to prove its there. The good news - I doubt that's a common belief among scientists, just that unfortunately that's how they tend to convey it to the layperson.
Humbly watching Youtube in Universe 25. - Me
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021