?

Log in

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Antidote to Biased Thinking

New research uncovers a nugget about what makes people listen to actual science, instead of interpreting it based on their beliefs: appreciating the scientific process itself. The Washington Post reports.

Democrats and Republicans who showed more scientific curiosity were less…
WASHINGTONPOST.COM|BY CHRIS MOONEY
























John Farnham Part of a trend to be more convincing by using applied psychology rather than argument. Like Strawman Argumentation to misrepresent choice and use of a 'Denier' meme to posit a yes/no situation, this has more to do with controlling accepted content than stimulating free ranging discussion.




<input ... >
John Christopher Gay I have found that if accepted, spiritual dogma, as it is taught by the individual preacher's own interpretation, or the individual churches' interpretations of the Bible, is then engaged with Science, there will be a HUGE conflict within the mind of the individual who is trying to learn the rational thinking methods of Science- truths that must be reproducible by others or generally accepted by "a multitude of council" as in peer review; but only because the curiousness has already been satisfied by the dogma. However, if we learn to question if Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are real or not, learn Science FIRST, then read the Bible, it will entirely make sense. One can be better able to treat it as a "holy" book, as it will be experienced like an instruction manual, or an ancient psychology text, or even a fairly accurate and enjoyable read as a historical text: as it actually IS the very embodiment of thousands of years of mental energy, the minds/souls/lifeforce of all of the monks who died to protect Christianity, for example; or the scribes who worked by candle-light, laboring in secret to keep the light of writing and the ancient knowledge of geometry alive during the dark ages. People are idiots, and they often have conflict with other idiots. There is NO conflict between Science and the Bible, nor any decent quality of ancient religion for that matter, such as Hindu or Native America sacred writings. God used the Navaho code to win World War II. You can't DISPROVE the unprovable. I also find it very disturbing to see devoted atheists who bully believers who are totally ignorant of the methods of rational thinking, just because they were too poor to get a quality science education before their heads got pumped full of bullshit. Telling an idiot or an enlightened individual alike that "god" does not exist is basically the same as saying "YOU are wrong", or "YOU don't exist", which are mean things for a bully to say to another soul, who obviously DOES exist or sometimes desires companionship. We are all just people here on this planet, trying to evolve a better political solution to all of the world's problems, especially the existential threats like global warming, or a planetary comet strike. Sorry for the long post. I guess i must have found this to be an interesting and thought provoking article, providing some hope that acts of logical thinking might someday occur on the Capital hill, lol.


John Farnham The problem with worldview of the Bible - especially for those confused souls who do not notice it was commissioned by King James of England to program the beliefs of his subjects i.e. serfs - is that the promise of the state is obscured by the focus of those telling the story of how the state theocracy in an occupied nation managed to falsely accuse, imprison, torture ( good for false confessions ) and kill a man for teaching compassion and healing. That makes it a morality tale as warning NOT to emulate the victim of priests. Which has nothing to do with God : an undefinable concept often promoted as an immortal, all powerful being who priests will tell you they know all about and must intercede for you as if they were lawyers. Selling the Brooklyn Bridge has nothing on that nonsense, also used to promote the 'Divine Right of Kings'.

Australia's prime minister decided climate science does matter. Reutersreports on Malcolm Turnbull's post-election about-face.

Australia's re-elected conservative government has announced a U-turn in its climate change policy, reinstating climate science as the bedrock of its…
REUTERS.COM|BY REUTERS EDITORIAL







Australia's re-elected conservative government has announced a U-turn in its climate change policy, reinstating climate science as the bedrock of its peak science body just months after slashing its funding and axing hundreds of jobs.

"It's a new government and we're laying out a direction that climate science matters," new Science Minister Greg Hunt told Australian radio on Thursday.

Scientists and climate change advocates cautiously welcomed the news, but remained concerned about the commitment to fight climate change, which could threaten Australia's food security and its ability to feed Asia's growing, affluent middle class.

John F aka oldephartte   Is anyone still confused about this being a political initiative rather than a matter  of abstract and impartial discussion ?