The so-called "scientific method" (if there is such a thing) has undergone dramatic changes throughout history, but there is one constant that can be relied upon: the myth of scientism.
Stalin, who read Darwin in divinity school and turned atheist, became a ruthless dictator whose reign of terror killed multiple millions more than Hitler. One of his evil deeds is being remembered: a railroad project in Siberia that was never completed despite causing the deaths of at least 100,000 people.
The way to make a concept impregnable is to use rhetorical devices to render competition out of bounds, and then nationalize the favored view. An AP story demonstrates how this is done with evolution.
Should you trust the diagnosis of a psychiatrist? If it helps, individuals are free to choose. Behind the scenes, however, there are severe, deep-seated debates about whether psychiatrists understand disorders, let alone diagnose them properly.
A creationist group in Hong Kong is releasing a dramatic documentary filled with fantastic claims about the discovery of Noah's Ark on Mt. Ararat. Other prominent creationists are warning of fraud and scientific malpractice.
Wernher von Braun (1912-1977) would have turned 100 on March 23. His name is almost synonymous with "rocket scientist" to many. Father of the American space program, including the first American satellite, the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs, the moon landings and Skylab, von Braun left an indelible mark on America and the world.
Incredible as it sounds, the science news media seem to have a liberal bias. This is astonishing, considering the vast majority of science professors in academia are Democrats. The following examples illustrate this trend that came to light around 1859.
V & V. That’s shorthand in project design for “validation and verification.” Does the scientific method provide V & V? We are all taught to think that peer review, publication and replication help science to be self-checking, so as to avoid error. Some recent articles show that ain’t necessarily so. It may sound good in theory, but in practice, the ideal doesn’t always match the real.
Some philosophy is just common sense. Some is abstruse, recondite, and technically challenging. But when employed against common sense, such as to support the belief that everything came from nothing, philosophy can get downright weird.
Science is conducted by humans for humans. It is not done in a vacuum. Even the lone researcher working in a basement hopes to make a discovery worth sharing. The need for ethical science shows most clearly when humans experiment on humans – with or without their consent. Two recent articles underscore the indispensability of moral grounds for science, and a third raises questions about the source of morality.