GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
Post Reply
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by Sculptor1 »

Pattern-chaser wrote: July 29th, 2022, 6:39 am
Sculptor1 wrote: July 27th, 2022, 12:59 pm What is your worst fear?
Pattern-chaser wrote: July 27th, 2022, 1:13 pm My worst fear is two fears:

1. That scientists misunderstand the function of the genetic material they manipulate, and thereby their work has unintended consequences, that maybe only become obvious long after the offending material is spread throughout our eco-system, or

2. That the additional genetic material added along with the intended changes has unintended consequences, that maybe only become obvious long after the offending material is spread throughout our eco-system.

We are far from omniscient. We make mistakes, sometimes really big ones. And we do it again and again, as we have for many years. We refuse to temper our enthusiasm for novelty, even though we know we should really take longer to consider all the little details that seem so trivial to the companies desperate to recoup their financial investment in R&D.
Sculptor1 wrote: July 27th, 2022, 3:11 pm Such as....
Pattern-chaser wrote: July 28th, 2022, 9:04 am Thalidomide, Agent Orange, nuclear weapons; we could even consider our burning of fossil fuels in this light...?
Sculptor1 wrote: July 28th, 2022, 9:49 am None of these have anything to do with GMO.
Shall I ask again?
There's no point in asking again, you aren't listening to the answer(s). The examples I gave are of new discoveries released into the environment that subsequently caused significant and 'unexpected' damage, when hindsight confirms that we should have been more cautious, and tested the discovery in question more thoroughly. GMO has the potential to be one such discovery.
You are talking about toxic chemical and metabolic derangements.
GMO is completely different.
It's like you are not listening to my questions. GMO species like any other have to cope with natural selection. That makes them more vulnerable than non GMO.
I won't ask again, since you do not seem to want to think this through completely.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Sculptor1 wrote: July 29th, 2022, 7:13 am You are talking about toxic chemical and metabolic derangements.
GMO is completely different.
I repeat:
Pattern-chaser wrote: July 29th, 2022, 6:39 am The examples I gave are of new discoveries released into the environment that subsequently caused significant and 'unexpected' damage, when hindsight confirms that we should have been more cautious, and tested the discovery in question more thoroughly. GMO has the potential to be one such discovery.
Do you disagree that "GMO has the potential to be one such discovery"?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by Sculptor1 »

Pattern-chaser wrote: July 29th, 2022, 8:55 am
Sculptor1 wrote: July 29th, 2022, 7:13 am You are talking about toxic chemical and metabolic derangements.
GMO is completely different.
I repeat:
Pattern-chaser wrote: July 29th, 2022, 6:39 am The examples I gave are of new discoveries released into the environment that subsequently caused significant and 'unexpected' damage, when hindsight confirms that we should have been more cautious, and tested the discovery in question more thoroughly. GMO has the potential to be one such discovery.
Do you disagree that "GMO has the potential to be one such discovery"?
No.
No more than a sailing ship causes global warming.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Pattern-chaser wrote: July 29th, 2022, 6:39 am The examples I gave are of new discoveries released into the environment that subsequently caused significant and 'unexpected' damage, when hindsight confirms that we should have been more cautious, and tested the discovery in question more thoroughly. GMO has the potential to be one such discovery.
Pattern-chaser wrote: July 29th, 2022, 8:55 am Do you disagree that "GMO has the potential to be one such discovery"?
Sculptor1 wrote: July 29th, 2022, 10:03 am No.
No more than a sailing ship causes global warming.
From your words, I think you mis-read my question, and intended to answer "yes". If so, what has convinced you that there is no significant possibility of some sort of significant negative consequence of releasing GMO products into the environment?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by Sculptor1 »

Pattern-chaser wrote: July 29th, 2022, 10:13 am
Pattern-chaser wrote: July 29th, 2022, 6:39 am The examples I gave are of new discoveries released into the environment that subsequently caused significant and 'unexpected' damage, when hindsight confirms that we should have been more cautious, and tested the discovery in question more thoroughly. GMO has the potential to be one such discovery.
Pattern-chaser wrote: July 29th, 2022, 8:55 am Do you disagree that "GMO has the potential to be one such discovery"?
Sculptor1 wrote: July 29th, 2022, 10:03 am No.
No more than a sailing ship causes global warming.
From your words, I think you mis-read my question, and intended to answer "yes". If so, what has convinced you that there is no significant possibility of some sort of significant negative consequence of releasing GMO products into the environment?
I think the possibility is far more remote than you think.
GMO crops tend to be very fragile, and dependant on technology to grow them. Golden Rice for example requires the grower continue to buy seed stock each year, as the inventors are keen to maintain copy rights.
And this is true of most developments in crop innovations.
GMO does not contain alien DNA, but DNA from other plants. In the "environment" they are not likely to thrive in a situation where natural selection is in play.
They might upset pre-existing highly modified (though not GMO as such) crops that are also fragile.

But the feeling I get is that you simply have unfounded fears based on sensationalist "Frankenstein" headlines and not practical objections.
value
Premium Member
Posts: 748
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by value »

Pattern-chaser wrote: July 25th, 2022, 11:08 am
value wrote: July 23rd, 2022, 5:47 pm What does the concept antiscience mean? It seems that the essence of antiscience is mere 'lack of trust'.
I think it's gone far beyond a simple lack of trust. There are people for whom their right to their opinion have somehow extended to include their 'right' for that opinion to be right (correct). There are many things in our culture that buoy up this idea, including the cult of the individual, disdain for experts and expertise, and a large dose of wishful thinking.

Such cloudy thinking is also helped along by those who misapply science, trying to use science to justify things upon which science cannot usefully pronounce...
I am not so certain that that perspective is correct in a general sense. For example, the people that question science on grounds such as moral concerns and that then decide to destroy fields of GMO crops do not necessarily need to act with the idea that they are right or that their idea of right is better than that of the GMO industry.

There mere ability to argue that the GMO practice is questionable and that grave unresolved concerns apply would provide a ground for a demand to prevent GMO crops to be planted until those issues are resolved in a decent manner (with reason).

For example, a valid question would be: can morality for plants and animals be safely ignored?

The following discussion provides an example:
psyreporter wrote: April 24th, 2022, 4:25 am
Sculptor1 wrote: April 17th, 2022, 8:21 am
psyreporter wrote: April 17th, 2022, 8:11 am
Sculptor1 wrote: April 17th, 2022, 6:11 amThis is somewhat laughable. For some reason the mysteries of the universe which have puzzled humans for thousands of years you seem to have the answer to.
So what are your concrete objections to GMO?
You are demanding an answer within the scope of empirical value (utilitarian value) while at question is whether morality on behalf of animals, which would concern their meaningful experience of which the philosophical zombie theory has indicated that science cannot grasp or explain it, can be safely ignored.
In other words...
I am asking if you have any evidence of any kind for anything you say, yes.
Well, if the question cannot be answered by science, wouldn't that be evidence (that it cannot be safely ignored, simply because the concept safety would require an answer)?
Would you disagree with my conclusion? If not, do you believe that it is wrong to demand prevention of GMO crops until the question has been answered?

The 'blunt' labelling of people as being 'anti-science' that should be combatted like a major security treat is not indicative that the issues have been addressed in a decent manner (with reason).

The people that destroy GMO crops are blamed for 'killing thousands of children' due to the utilitarian value that those crops would provide to those children. That isn't addressing any issues with reason. That is 'combatting' and personally attacking with multi-million USD marketing budgets based on an ideology - a certain belief about science - the belief that 'sowing doubt about science' is a wrong that should be combatted and punished as a major security threat. It concerns prosecuting people for heresy of science.

The essence of anti-science therefore, seems to be mere lack of trust, despite the actions and specific motivations of people involved, until it can be shown that reason applies for the label, which according to philosopher Justin B. Biddle, a specialist on the subject, is not the case.

The “anti-science” or “war on science” narrative has become popular among science journalists. While there is no question that some opponents of GMOs are biased or ignorant of the relevant facts, the blanket tendency to characterize critics as anti-science or engaged in a war on science is both misguided and dangerous.
https://philpapers.org/rec/BIDAZVPhilPapers
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Sculptor1 wrote: July 29th, 2022, 4:48 pm I think the possibility is far more remote than you think.
I think we both know that. But how do you know? On what is your confidence based? You assert that I am wrong, but you don't offer the reassurance that any sceptic might reasonably request. Given the severity of the risk if it comes to pass, it is reasonable, I think, to request some clear and conclusive evidence of safety. Where is that evidence?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
value
Premium Member
Posts: 748
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by value »

Sculptor1 wrote: July 29th, 2022, 4:48 pm But the feeling I get is that you simply have unfounded fears based on sensationalist "Frankenstein" headlines and not practical objections.
What about the will to live in plants and animals? What about their 'meaningful experience'? What about that what it takes for animals and plants to have come into existence?

The idea of natural selection or Darwinian evolution might be wrong. Arguing this might 'sow doubt about science' but can it be said that that is wrong?

Can meaningful experience in animals and plants be safely ignored?

It seems that a whole lot of understanding about plants and animals is evidently missing.

The most basic question is unanswered: why does life exist? unknown
  • Is determinism true and is the idea of a spirit invalid? unknown
  • Is the concept happiness important for animals and plants? unknown
  • Does the spirit merely use genetic information and is altering genes like giving the spirit a new tool? unknown

Life might not be as simple and purely technical as it is assumed when it concerns GMO.

In my opinion, the complex coherence of genes provides in more than the human can possibly 'see' in it. It might be an error to factor out the unknown future in which the genetic information performs in the form of a spirit or will to live.

A plant might have 'feelings' that are important in its interaction with animals such as insects. Those feelings might provide subtle guiding roles in an eco-system that enables the eco-system to perform and advance optimally, i.e. to be happy and healthy in the face of an unknown future, which requires concepts such as resilience.

The guiding role that those presumed feelings and expressions may play in an eco-system might involve a motivating role: a reason for existence for fragile pieces of nature. Tiny insects and other creatures.

Humans themselves often argue that all humans need love. Why would that be different for a tiny insect? The love that they might receive from a happy and healthy plant might underlay their 'raison d'être' (reason for being).

Flowering plants can hear buzzing bees—and it makes their nectar sweeter
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/scie ... ar-sweeter

Plants 'Scream' in the Face of Stress
https://www.livescience.com/plants-sque ... essed.html

Flowers are talking to animals—and humans are just starting to listen
https://qz.com/1522637/humans-are-learn ... d-animals/

Plants Attract Enemy's Enemies To Survive
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... nemys-ene/

When plants can talk, what about happiness?

GMO - corruption of the foundation of the spirit - could cause fatal damage to eco-systems by disrupting the will for being in tiny creatures.

Is the above issue addressed? no

Are people who address the issue labelled anti-science and prosecuted (combatted) for heresy of science? yes (because 'sowing doubt' about scientific beliefs such as 'natural selection' is considered a 'wrong').
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by Sculptor1 »

Pattern-chaser wrote: July 30th, 2022, 8:07 am
Sculptor1 wrote: July 29th, 2022, 4:48 pm I think the possibility is far more remote than you think.
I think we both know that. But how do you know? On what is your confidence based? You assert that I am wrong, but you don't offer the reassurance that any sceptic might reasonably request. Given the severity of the risk if it comes to pass, it is reasonable, I think, to request some clear and conclusive evidence of safety. Where is that evidence?
Obviously - if you want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, you are going to have to offer something more than hysteria
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Sculptor1 wrote: July 29th, 2022, 4:48 pm I think the possibility is far more remote than you think.
Pattern-chaser wrote: July 30th, 2022, 8:07 am I think we both know that. But how do you know? On what is your confidence based? You assert that I am wrong, but you don't offer the reassurance that any sceptic might reasonably request. Given the severity of the risk if it comes to pass, it is reasonable, I think, to request some clear and conclusive evidence of safety. Where is that evidence?
Sculptor1 wrote: July 30th, 2022, 8:48 am Obviously - if you want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, you are going to have to offer something more than hysteria
So you don't have an answer, and you don't have the evidence I asked for? As I thought. My case is not hysterical if you cannot offer real and persuasive sureties that the release of GMOs into the environment is safe.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
value
Premium Member
Posts: 748
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by value »

My first perspective on GMO when I first looked into it was that it would result in a situation in which humans would feed themselves through the anus - as if they would stick their head in their anus.

The anus would be the output of science - a result that is how it is intended to be from the perspective of the human. The core of the human (its head) would be stuck into its anus. Such a result cannot facilitate what it takes to have become.

The logic: “An attempt to stand above life, as being life, logically results in a figurative stone that sinks in the ocean of time.

The idea: “It may be best to serve life instead of trying to stand above it.

GMO as a food source can be seen as a form of inbreeding.
value
Premium Member
Posts: 748
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by value »

Pattern-chaser wrote: July 30th, 2022, 8:53 amSo you don't have an answer, and you don't have the evidence I asked for? As I thought. My case is not hysterical if you cannot offer real and persuasive sureties that the release of GMOs into the environment is safe.
Do you believe that your reasoning would be a justification to destroy fields of GMO crops? Alternatively, do you understand people who would when their concern is neglected as being 'anti-science'?
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by Sculptor1 »

Pattern-chaser wrote: July 30th, 2022, 8:53 am
Sculptor1 wrote: July 29th, 2022, 4:48 pm I think the possibility is far more remote than you think.
Pattern-chaser wrote: July 30th, 2022, 8:07 am I think we both know that. But how do you know? On what is your confidence based? You assert that I am wrong, but you don't offer the reassurance that any sceptic might reasonably request. Given the severity of the risk if it comes to pass, it is reasonable, I think, to request some clear and conclusive evidence of safety. Where is that evidence?
Sculptor1 wrote: July 30th, 2022, 8:48 am Obviously - if you want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, you are going to have to offer something more than hysteria
So you don't have an answer, and you don't have the evidence I asked for? As I thought. My case is not hysterical if you cannot offer real and persuasive sureties that the release of GMOs into the environment is safe.
I've been doing this far too long to fall for that cheap trick.
The burden is on you to produce evidence.
So where is the nightmare Frankenstein scenario?

On the other hand GMO has saved the Papaya crop with extinction from ringworm carried by aphids.
It has produced rice that includes vitamin A in its tissues.
Meanwhile as the Frankenstein villagers are waving their torches about GMO corn has offered increased yields for over 20 years.

But watch out for those Triffids, on the way home.
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by Sculptor1 »

IN addition to yield benefits GMO crops need less insecticide and are resistant to herbicides.
This means less pollution and less fossil fuels burned in factories making chemicals.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: GMO debate and the 'anti-science' narrative

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Sculptor1 wrote: July 29th, 2022, 4:48 pm I think the possibility is far more remote than you think.
Pattern-chaser wrote: July 30th, 2022, 8:07 am I think we both know that. But how do you know? On what is your confidence based? You assert that I am wrong, but you don't offer the reassurance that any sceptic might reasonably request. Given the severity of the risk if it comes to pass, it is reasonable, I think, to request some clear and conclusive evidence of safety. Where is that evidence?
Sculptor1 wrote: July 30th, 2022, 8:48 am Obviously - if you want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, you are going to have to offer something more than hysteria
Pattern-chaser wrote: July 30th, 2022, 8:53 am So you don't have an answer, and you don't have the evidence I asked for? As I thought. My case is not hysterical if you cannot offer real and persuasive sureties that the release of GMOs into the environment is safe.
Sculptor1 wrote: July 30th, 2022, 12:02 pm I've been doing this far too long to fall for that cheap trick.
The burden is on you to produce evidence.
There is no such "burden"; this is a philosophy forum, not a nursery school.

We are having this discussion (too) late, in actuality, as GMOs have been created and released. Nevertheless, I am recommending caution, and you are asserting the safety of GMOs, but you can't seem to say why, or on what basis. The worst-case consequences of GMOs are severe, but you recommend taking this risk ... without offering evidence on which this recommendation is based. Is your position not somewhat reckless?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
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