• Lammy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    There is no objectively falsifiable hypothesis, or imperially reproducible result.

    Don’t bring science into politics, that’s what religions and governments have tried to do for years as part of propaganda / anti-science campaigns. It never goes well even if you think it’s morally correct, because scientific reality does not always align with, nor does it care about current morality. Nevertheless science is objectively true.

      • Lammy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Emotions (like regret) are not falsifiable, because they are not scientific phenomena. Similarly, you cannot have a scientific study on whether art is good, or if god is real, because they are by definition unscientific phenomena. That is why unscientific studies like this post, should not be allowed in a forum on science.

        But perhaps the more important point here, is that conflating unscientific matters with actual science, has been at the heart of the anti-science movement, since science was discovered. It makes it much easier to discredit all of science as a whole, when you start claiming that social studies is science.

        • mrpants@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          You truly have no idea what you’re talking about with regards to science, hypotheses, and how they work.

            • mrpants@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You should look it up for yourself if you don’t think subjective experiences can be defined and measured in an objective and falsifiable way.

              You could, for example, conduct a falsifiable experiment related to people’s perception of color or heat or their night vision.

              • Lammy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Subjective, by definition, cannot be objective. It sounds like you’re talking about social studies.

        • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          And that’s why every study that goes against the existence of trans people and efficacy of gender affirming care is bunk bullshit and every actual good study confirms it.

          You are free to spend the rest of your life malding about the TIMs or the AGPs or troons or whatever your specific flavour of idiot decides to call trans people, just stop pretending any real science agrees with you.

          • Lammy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Obviously you really want this to be about trans people, but it’s not, it’s about science.

            Science doesn’t agree with me because I have no opinion on the issue.

            I do however, believe in the importance of the scientific method.