Science and Data: Notes on a Misconception
The theory that science is based on evidence derives from a philosophy known as empiricism.
A collection of 371 posts
The theory that science is based on evidence derives from a philosophy known as empiricism.
Feminist research into sex differences has typically concluded that the number of sex differences is small, and therefore unimportant, thus making the logical error that a small number of differences means those differences are inconsequential.
Careless in his facts, Coyne is also careless in his references.
Day by day, as genetic science advances, it becomes ever clearer that all psychological traits are genetically influenced.
The last lesson of Gelernter’s piece is that while we shouldn’t judge someone’s arguments by their credentials alone, neither should we give unwarranted credence to those who have impressive credentials, particularly when they pronounce on a field in which they lack expertise.
Shouting someone down for speaking a thought in public effectively ends the critical discussion. There can be no further exploration of why the idea at issue is wrong, or what kernel of truth there may be therein.
I was a child in the 1960s, and I embraced Apollo as the adventure of all time
The YouTube-rabbit-hole phenomenon will undoubtedly continue to radicalize certain individuals. But give it time, let the churn machine keep churning.
Essays attacking the left- or right-wing bias of this or that media outlet are, of course, old hat in my business.
Moreover, the conclusion that harassment drives women from physics contradicts publicly available data on the progression of women in physics careers.
Instead of empty analogies, the only way to survive change is to have a vigorous debate about the merits of our new ideas—precisely the kind of debate that techno-optimists want to foreclose by appealing to history.
Some might claim that electric power is far more of a necessity that social media access.
It is reasonably entertaining to read, and does make some valid points about the misuse of “race science.” Unfortunately, it is also tendentious, dogmatic, and seriously misleading about the current state of scientific knowledge.
The more rapid and intense the brain reward they imparted, the likelier they were to foster pathological learning and craving, particularly among socially and genetically vulnerable consumers.
Sending millions more people to clinicians, creating a society even more fearful of lurking diseases, and systematically robbing people of the normal arc of life and death–this, I am afraid, is where the digital health expansion is heading.