Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vector]

This is why deferring to science is the thing you should do when you don't have a good alternative.

But what you don't seem to understand is that menotoxin was what science said was correct.  Same with a whole bunch of other myths about women.

And women would have told you that it was incorrect.  The conflict between lived science and experience leads to better studies that do a better job of measuring what is actually to be measured.  Had I lived in that era and heard that science, should I have deferred to it and taken to cloistering myself because they said I was poisonous?  How about now--should I have given up on studying mathematics because of all those "scientific opinions" explaining that women simply couldn't stand on the same footing as men, in order to wait for the AMS study that confirmed what I thought made more sense?

[Frumple]

... you... you don't actually know much about how the practice of science works, do you MSH? Because what people think and what tradition says is true has (and has had) a hell of a lot of influence on the actual practice of scientific research, and apparently claiming that it doesn't just... flies in the face of basically everything.

Does tend to do pretty well over the long term for correcting that sort of thing, yes, but the short to mid term (you know, a generation, a lifetime, little things like that) have been kind of fraught -- and continue to be fraught -- with institutional inertia and its varying accouterments getting in all sorts of the way. Especially in the field of psychology and psychiatry. Which. Yeah. That is why you don't defer exclusively to medical science. How, when, and where it fucks up and has consistently fucked up is a known factor we haven't fully been able to correct for, yet. Scientific research has its fairly consistent methodological errors, y'dig?

Also:

And while we all have different experiences, the physical differences between the brains of individuals are low enough that what can be empirically determined is what can and must form the basis.

We're not actually at the point we can tell, physically, exactly what and how crap is buggering up in quite a few bloody cases. So that sort of thing isn't always an option, yeah.

[Neonivek]

The reason why one doesn't defer exclusively to medical science is because menotoxin.  People's subjective experience of their own conditions is crucial in a world where power structures determine what is studied and from which standpoint.

That isn't the only reason. Another is just the major flaw with all science. In that ultimately no matter how intricate and accurate the information you have before you, it still needs to be interpreted to be of any use. Otherwise it is just a big clump of data.

Mind you this is a lot more common in things like sociology then it would be in something like Medical science.

The other is not because "power structures" but rather just how pseudoscience can enter reputable science. untested theories can become outright fact if they are not challenged or if they enter enough academic material.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

This is why deferring to science is the thing you should do when you don't have a good alternative.

But what you don't seem to understand is that menotoxin was what science said was correct.  Same with a whole bunch of other myths about women.

By what evidence? If there isn't evidence, you can't exactly have a conclusion!

And women would have told you that it was incorrect.

Given the history of the subject, and what they had been taught by their religious figures, I don't think they would have. The Bible says menstruating women are poisonous/unclean/evil harlots/whatever, therefore it is true.

The conflict between lived science and experience leads to better studies that do a better job of measuring what is actually to be measured.  Had I lived in that era and heard that science, should I have deferred to it and taken to cloistering myself because they said I was poisonous?  How about now--should I have given up on studying mathematics because of all those "scientific opinions" explaining that women simply couldn't stand on the same footing as men, in order to wait for the AMS study that confirmed what I thought made more sense?

All of this boils down to why we have peer review, Vector. But it doesn't mean you can start admitting personal anecdotes as evidence. People have anecdotes for just about anything you can imagine.

... you... you don't actually know much about how the practice of science works, do you MSH? Because what people think and what tradition says is true has (and has had) a hell of a lot of influence on the actual practice of scientific research, and apparently claiming that it doesn't just... flies in the face of basically everything.

Does tend to do pretty well over the long term for correcting that sort of thing, yes, but the short to mid term (you know, a generation, a lifetime, little things like that) have been kind of fraught -- and continue to be fraught -- with institutional inertia and its varying accouterments getting in all sorts of the way. Especially in the field of psychology and psychiatry. Which. Yeah. That is why you don't defer exclusively to medical science. How, when, and where it fucks up and has consistently fucked up is a known factor we haven't fully been able to correct for, yet. Scientific research has its fairly consistent methodological errors, y'dig?

I know exactly how science works, thank you very much. And while personal biases can certainly seep in, and getting rid of that can take time, do you know what the alternative is? Never progressing and getting increasingly bogged down in ever more personal bias.

There is not a better alternative. We have to go with the assumption that what we think we know now is better than what we thought we knew in the past, or else we shall be paralyzed in unyielding indecision and do zero good.

[Vector]

They did a scientific study, of course.

[Neonivek]

By what evidence? If there isn't evidence, you can't exactly have a conclusion!

Well let me see... There are toxins in blood and toxins that are created by the decomposition of blood.

It is easy enough to turn that into evidence. Though I don't know if that was "their" evidence.

[Solifuge]

By what evidence? If there isn't evidence, you can't exactly have a conclusion!

Well let me see... There are toxins in blood and toxins that are created by the decomposition of blood.

It is easy enough to turn that into evidence. Though I don't know if that was "their" evidence.

According to the link, the evidence was that, when a woman who was on her period manhandled some flowers, they wilted sooner than undisturbed flowers. Afterward, animals injected with menstrual blood from a foreign organism, were found to die (and given what we now know about the immune system, this should not come as a surprise). It was pretty shitty science, but it was still science. And conclusions from that study directed research and social/interpersonal policy for decades after.

My friend accidentally misspelled angel with angle, while talking about a baby. It was quite funny.

Must've been acute baby.

[Sirus]

My friend accidentally misspelled angel with angle, while talking about a baby. It was quite funny.

Must've been acute baby.

Don't be obtuse, Soli. It was simply a misunderstanding, right?

[My Name is Immaterial]

My friend accidentally misspelled angel with angle, while talking about a baby. It was quite funny.

Must've been acute baby.

Don't be obtuse, Soli. It was simply a misunderstanding, right?

Right, lets stop making such terrible puns.

[kaijyuu]

My friend accidentally misspelled angel with angle, while talking about a baby. It was quite funny.

Must've been acute baby.

Don't be obtuse, Soli. It was simply a misunderstanding, right?

Right, lets stop making such terrible puns.

But this way everyone's on equilateral footing.

...yeah I'm stretching it.

[Neonivek]

Looks like we have been... PUNished!

[Vattic]

On triggers: Starting with a warning when dealing with tough subjects makes sense, but if almost anything could be a trigger to someone I can't think of a way to make it workable without ignoring some people. This makes some of the items in trigger warning lists seem silly to me. I guess it can depend on your audience.

I'm so tired and I really want to get out of here.  The house stinks and it's full of flies, which I'm not personally cleaning up because she wants to keep rotten fruit out on the counters just in case she feels like cooking with it.  I'm getting depressed thanks to the environment and each day feels like it lasts only a couple minutes because I don't do anything, but I just can't get myself motivated to improve my life when I know I'll be moving out in less than a week and I could just relax and play computer games now and deal with anything that needs to get done later.  Of course, she gets upset at me because I stay up late to avoid having to share schedules, and keeps trying to explain how I'm screwing up my life, going downhill, blah blah blah.

I don't know your circumstances in any detail. Couldn't you leave early and stay somewhere else, even if it's just some cheap room?

[Darvi]

On triggers: Starting with a warning when dealing with tough subjects makes sense, but if almost anything could be a trigger to someone I can't think of a way to make it workable without ignoring some people. This makes some of the items in trigger warning lists seem silly to me. I guess it can depend on your audience.

This is why you put everything conceivable into those warnings.

Like, for this thread I would warn about: Stupid, people, stupid people, not so stupid people, quotes, ignorance, well-informedness, racism, acceptance, politics, education, lack of education, internet, tropes, social media, comments (those actually trigger me. They trigger the "why the fuck did I scroll down this far"-thoughts), forum avatars, signatures, nineballs, magma, and trigger warnings.

[werty892]

first they pointed out how horrible, racist and eurocentric it was to not make a subsaharan nation as strong as france

How in Satan's glorious name did they twist the rules of logic and common sense to make that a valid statement?

Because EU4 is a HISTORICAL GAME. That means Europe is powerful. If you want Mali, or whatever, to take over the world, get mods to have everyone start equally.

[Shakerag]

On triggers: Starting with a warning when dealing with tough subjects makes sense, but if almost anything could be a trigger to someone I can't think of a way to make it workable without ignoring some people. This makes some of the items in trigger warning lists seem silly to me. I guess it can depend on your audience.

Just operate on the principle that no one has a right to not be offended.