Print

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

[hector13]

The scientific method does at least try to reduce subjectivity.

Statistics can be made to show what you want them to show though.

See: Covenant

[Orange Wizard]

And the entire point of science as in the scientific method is that it isn't objective, just likely in less or more grade depending on how well trialed it has been.

Um

the entire point of the scientific method is to be objective

subjectivity in science is bad juju

[BorkBorkGoesTheCode]

At best it reduces subjectivity.

[Erkki]

And a lot of things are objective. Science and statistics exist because objectivity is extremely useful. Opinions that defy rationality are less valuable than rational ones.

Aye, but irrational(or wrong) opinions, values, laws or traditions can be, by an individual, perceived as rational through these so called "morals". Making them subjective... If you believe in morals that is.

Scientific method I believe reduces dishonesty and subjectivity... Wether or not making decisions through scientific method is always best for everyone or in practice even possible I dont know. Maybe at some point we'll see an oligarchic nation where the ruling class is composed of scientists at some point so we can observe that. 100% objectively, of course. 

[Rolepgeek]

And a lot of things are objective. Science and statistics exist because objectivity is extremely useful. Opinions that defy rationality are less valuable than rational ones.

Aye, but irrational(or wrong) opinions, values, laws or traditions can be, by an individual, perceived as rational through these so called "morals". Making them subjective... If you believe in morals that is.

Scientific method I believe reduces dishonesty and subjectivity... Wether or not making decisions through scientific method is always best for everyone or in practice even possible I dont know. Maybe at some point we'll see an oligarchic nation where the ruling class is composed of scientists at some point so we can observe that. 100% objectively, of course. 

A true technocracy would appear to be many different nations all with subtly and uniquely different government types, but multiples of each distinct type, possibly with just enough differences to allow isolation of variables within the styles of government, in order to determine which is the most effective.

Which means....!!!

[BorkBorkGoesTheCode]

Illuminati. Boo?

[hector13]

Noticed that someone had edited in a request for a link to that Jeremy Corbyn interview I mentioned a couple of pages back; here it is.

Also worth watching to see him lose his rag with Jackie Long not once but twice (I could understand it if it were an annoying twat like Krishnan-Guru Murthy, but Jackie Long's one of the better C4 news presenters). He's not exactly a charming fella, that Corbyn.

... there was a recent interview with Jeremy Corbyn (leader of the Opposition in my country) ... It reached a point where the reporter was repeating to Corbyn 'But voters have told you what they want. They want less immigration', and with a angry sneer on his face, he snapped at her and basically said 'We know better. They might think they want that, but we know what is best for them.'

I thought you weren't responding to me no more.

He neither said nor did what you said he did.

He got annoyed with the reporter because she interrupted him (second time was more amusing since there was a massive pause between him talking and her "interrupting") and he never said anything near to what you said, even by praphrasing... Are you a non-Labour version of Alastair Campbell?

Granted he didn't answer the question either, but that's pretty much par for the course for politicians. The very famous Newsnight interview between Jeremy Paxman and Michael Howard is a fantastically amusing example of that.

[Dorsidwarf]

Oh boy, it's the off-brand Loud Whispers, now with poorer fact-checking, and a disbelief in the human right to life instead of epic banter.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Oh boy, it's the off-brand Loud Whispers, now with poorer fact-checking, and a disbelief in the human right to life instead of epic banter.

Hey, that's my job!

[hector13]

Oh boy, it's the off-brand Loud Whispers, now with poorer fact-checking, and a disbelief in the human right to life instead of epic banter.

Hey, that's my job!

You should file a lawsuit.

[martinuzz]

29 Year old Aida Hadzialic, known for being both the youngest minister (of Higer Education) ever in Sweden, as well as the first muslim minister, has resigned, after she was caught by the police for drunk driving. She can face up to 6 months in prison as well, although usually the Swedish court settles drunk driving cases with a hefty fine.

I'm guessing she won't be welcome in the mosque anymore either.

[smjjames]

How long was she in office?

[scriver]

2 years, I believe, from -14.

For further details, she got caught with 0.2 promille, which is also the limit for the crime of Steerdrunkery in Sweden.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Steerdrunkery

It took me longer than I'd like to cognate that this wasn't some Swedish legal term.

[scriver]

It's a little bit Swedish legal term, given that it is the direct translation of rattfylleri, our name for the crime of driving intoxicated.

Possibly also wheeldrunkery.