Reason Rally (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, April 02, 2012, 16:07 (4596 days ago) @ xeno6696


> Finally, I'd like you to point me to where you got the statistic about "most" of all scientific papers being retracted after 3 years. Considering how fast paced some fields are (like my own computer science) it doesn't sound like a horrible number.-See my last reply on the forum:-> > TONY (B_M): [Science] insulates itself from moral responsibility.
> > 
> > DHW: Maybe some scientists do. Science itself is (or perhaps "should be") the study of the material universe. Morality is not its remit. If scientists behave immorally (or "insulate themselves"), one should not blame science, any more than one should blame Christianity for the un-Christian acts of many so-called Christians (ditto Islam, Judaism etc.). 
> > 
> 
> Science as a discipline is what I refer to, not the scientist. I say this because science as a discipline rarely considers whether they SHOULD do something, only concerning itself with whether or not it COULD do it. There has been more than one pandora's box opened by such negligence.-> Any time we speak in generalities we run the risk of condemning the innocent. Yes, it is the bigoted fundamentalist that I am referring too primarily. My accusation to science as a discipline though is the same that I leverage at religion and politics, that of allowing itself to be a platform for bigotry. -The validity of research is under question. In my opinion there is too much grant money from governments not insulated from political considerations; consider the climate studidity. This article makes a major point:-
http://telicthoughts.com/science-sucks/