Science
Religious Nones drawn to the occult (what did you expect?)
Guardian axed science blog, spreads sciencey rumors instead
Dilbert’s creator, Scott Adams, gives lessons in being a troll for science
Feynman, says Massimo Pigliucci, is wrong about beauty and truth in science
Why scientists tend to dismiss well-supported ideas that lie outside the paradigm
At one time, witchcraft was considered a Halloween hoot…
Michael Egnor: The cowardice of science organizations on when life begins
J. P. Moreland on when it is right to reject “science”
A science writer considers the cost of science functioning as an inquisition
Copernicus: National Geographic tries to get the history right
Ten thinkers tell us what post-modernism means
To judge from the flow of verbiage, it spells little good for the sciences. One rather inclines, in part, to Steven Weinberg’s succinct view,given last: Alas, it was too late. I may be just out of the loop, but it seems to me now that for scientists to argue against constructivism is beating a dead donkey. There is widespread skepticism about the judgments of science, on topics like climate change, but it has other sources — as far as I know, there are no social constructivists in the Trump administration. Steven Weinberg, “The Birth, Death, and Rebirth of Postmodernism” at Chronicle of Higher Education Actually, there is good reason for skepticism about the “judgments of science” that doesn’t flow from Read More ›