Instead of doing a study on religious affiliation and science beliefs (yawn), why not do one, with all the rumty-tumty and trappings, of who the suckers are who actually believe all that stuff uncritically? What else do they believe?
This predilection for occultism over philosophically argued religion will of course impact sciences. Indeed, it already does. Look at the number of stories we’ve been running here lately about science journals slowly making social justice warrior concerns equivalent to research.
Of course she’s right about the religion part. Much that is going wrong with science today is the tendency to use various science ideas as secular religions. The multiverse happens to be a particularly devastating one because it strikes at the very idea of evidence.
“Stick with analogs we know, you advise”? Yes, good idea. It used to be the usual approach among scientists. So why was it suddenly suspended? We are still wondering. Or maybe we know but no one wants to discuss it. See Tales of an invented god .
Look, these people needed a miracle from outer space and it was great while it lasted. But why is the embarrassing story being kept alive? Won’t another, similar one come along soon?
Come to think of it, believing in artificial intelligence or space aliens as god-like makes as much sense as believing in lucky numbers and charms.
Wait till you catch one of the fashionable witches also fronting the idea that we should all trust science. You can at least enjoy a sense of the ridiculous.
Why the textbook zombie can’t just die. Steve Dilley and Nicholas Trafacory “argue that a number of biology (and evolution) textbooks face a crippling dilemma.”
The good news is, we have far less to fear from hexes than from anti-free speech legislation and crackdowns on academic freedom at the universities. We really must encourage them all to spend more time, much more time, on hexes.
Setting the story of the heliocentric conception of the universe in the context of its time is more interesting than TV talking point.
As for the kids, if the prof’s figures are correct, they should have watched more sci-fi dystopias. The good news is that there probably aren’t any space aliens out there so they will only have to live in a dystopia they made themselves, not a different one.
One way of looking at it: If you believe vaguely that “there is something out there,” you needn’t do anything about it. You needn’t even avoid superstition. You can even be part of a war on science in good faith.
You, by the way, are doomed: Everything has a history, including Silicon Valley. According to a new media theorist, Douglas Rushkoff, an influential Valley philosophy might underlie the current attitudes, values, and beliefs: “There is a Silicon Valley religion, and it’s one that doesn’t particularly care for people — at least not in our present […]
Christian Smith: One of the key problems with atheist arguments for universal benevolence, according to Smith, is the contention that we live in a “naturalistic” universe, in a realm that simply came to be, with no creator. So how can naturalistic atheist thinkers claim any rational basis for the high moral standard they’re reaching for?
The question of whether the raging Woke have the right to do this stuff needs to be considered alongside whether anyone should be expected to fund their behavior through taxes or ponder their (increasingly mostly garbage) output—as conveyed to us through government and media.