Is this really science?

Cosmos, again. It was popular but was it telling the real story about science? Daniel Greenfield thinks it is The end of science.

“Carl Sagan was the country’s leading practitioner of the mythologization of science, transforming a process into a philosophy, substituting political agendas for inquiry and arrogance for research. Sagan was often wrong, but it didn’t matter because his errors were scientific, rather than ideological or theological. He could be wrong as many times as he wanted, as long as he wasn’t wrong politically..”

Science has become absolute and a belief rather than a process of discovery and learning. It has become something different than natural or human. The term is used as a weapon in the form of the logical fallacy of argument by authority.

“Science works as a process that utilizes a set of tools. It does not innately confer superiority on anyone. A scientist who does not utilize the scientific method is as much use as a carpenter who cannot make chairs or a plumber who cannot fix toilets. A science that exists as a fixed absolute, whose premises are not to be questioned, whose data is not to be examined and whose conclusions are not to be debated, is a pile of wood or a leaky toilet. Not the conclusion of a process, but its absence.

“It isn’t science that gives a thing legitimacy, but the processes of thinking and testing that do. The only authority worth mentioning is also worth questioning. That is as true of science as it is of government. An authority that answers to itself, that derives its power not from an open system, but from a closed system is a tyranny and prone to a failure-denial cycle in which each failure is then covered up by greater abuses of power until the disaster can no longer be covered up.”

“There is nothing to cheer about the return of Cosmos. It’s not science, instead it’s more of the popularized punditry that distorts science into an absolute dogma with a cynical agenda.”

It is ever seeking the priests who answer all questions than seeking out the answers oneself, it is accepting the edict of authority rather than the plebian search for limits and extent of knowledge and its sources.

Comments are closed.