There are a lot of opinions that can dramatically lower one's evolutionary fitness if expressed. For example, when Moses came down with his tablets and was, shall we say, depressed by the reception -- he asked for the "opinion" of those around him and those who agreed with him were then ordered to kill everyone else.
Civilization HO!!! On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:00 PM, William Beaty <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, 11 May 2013, Joshua Cude wrote: > >> I'm not interested in an inaccessible (non-archived) list like vortex-b, >> so >> I'll just slink away. I may post a few responses to Rothwell's latest >> replies over on wavewatching.net/fringe if they tolerate it. >> > > Or, just stick with the greater world of weird-but-nonCF subjects, where > you see that the evidence is not yet decisive, and there's low chance of > triggering a Believer vs. Debunker debate. This isn't a CF-only forum, > though it tends to function as one! :) > > I push the crackpot-friendly aspect as a long-time experiment in > "Provisional Acceptance" of crazy hypotheses. Currently in science, at > least where weird topics are concerned, we instead operate with a > philosophy of Provisional Disbelief, where we allow the evidence convince > us to change our minds. But since disbelief is itself a strong bias, what > happens if we test the opposite technique, and provisionally accept weird > topics in order to study them? Just try it, and everyone attacks you: > "You actually BELIEVE in that crap?!! ANYONE WHO TAKES THAT STUFF > SERIOUSLY IS A CRACKPOT." And of course the uncritical Believers want to > welcome you into the fold. > > This above situation strongly suggests that certain topics have never been > given a chance in the past. If each time someone tries to give them a > chance, and is stopped by colleages, then we may actually have no idea > whether those topics are truely Woo or not, since nobody is allowed to take > them seriously enough to properly "do the homework" before making an > informed decision. If we have to take on the (perceived) crackpot mantle > in order to do proper homework, then that's exactly what's needed: declare > oneself to be a True Believer Raving Loonie, then have at it. (Perhaps use > a fake name here in order to protect one's professional rep.) > > http://amasci.com/weird/vmore.**html<http://amasci.com/weird/vmore.html> > "Even so, I believe that many scientists have a habit of rejecting new > ideas because they unknowingly maintain an illusory worldview which is > based on concensus of colleagues, rather than upon evidence, and as a > result they become irrational. They become very intolerant of all ideas > which violate that consensus, and will instantly and thoughtlessly > reject the evidence supporting such ideas. This forum is for > scientist-types (including amateurs!) with a low tolerance for anything > resembling mob-rule, and a high tolerance for those crazy hypotheses. > > > > > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website > billb at amasci com http://amasci.com > > EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair > Seattle, WA 206-762-3818 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci > >
