General Discussion

RainDog

(28,784 posts)

63. oh, you have me all wrong

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:45 PM

Apr 2014

I'm not smart beyond my years - I've just been fortunate to know a lot of interesting people who have demonstrated to me how limited my knowledge truly is - and who made me interested in finding out about various things - within my limited ability to understand them. true.

I'm a hater of jargon - so, right there, I'm an enemy of academia in some respects. LOL.

Maybe my rebellious nature has served me well sometimes - others - not so much. Society has been my enemy as often as my friend, and maybe more so, depending on the society. One reason I have had so many male friends during my life is that I never fitted in with what I was supposed to think. It's been one of the joys of life.

I feel kinship with others who have similar frames of mind, tho, no doubt.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

86 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What pseudoscience is and is not. [View all] NuclearDem Apr 2014 OP

The issue that gets danced around- Materialism is NOT the de facto philosophy of science. KittyWampus Apr 2014 #1

If something can't be tested within the bounds of the natural world, NuclearDem Apr 2014 #4

I hope we can all agree that the use of the word 'woo' for this roguevalley Apr 2014 #24

Not philosophical materialism, at least. longship Apr 2014 #9

"I don't know anybody who practices science that does not practice methodological materialism." AverageJoe90 Apr 2014 #30

Well, Dawkins is definitely one I would put in the methodological materialist column. longship Apr 2014 #35

"Well, mainstream science took us to the moon," Oh, no doubt it did! AverageJoe90 Apr 2014 #50

A small quibble... cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #56

Agreed. Victor Stenger makes this very point in his "God:The Failed Hypothesis" longship Apr 2014 #68

So how does a so-called "idealist" decide which is the most effective treatment for a disease? Silent3 Apr 2014 #11

Sounds like Scintology MattBaggins Apr 2014 #85

Exactly! And to be truthful.....materialism, or at least of the ontological Dawkinsian type......... AverageJoe90 Apr 2014 #27

ontological Dawkinsian type......... AlbertCat Apr 2014 #29

It's bullshit, not woo RainDog Apr 2014 #48

Ah. You just saved me much typing. Thank you. Democracyinkind Apr 2014 #55

... RainDog Apr 2014 #59

Ok. That is. Uhm. A case in point? Democracyinkind Apr 2014 #61

oh, you have me all wrong RainDog Apr 2014 #63

You're not telling me that you don't actually have a degree in philosophy? Democracyinkind Apr 2014 #66

This message was self-deleted by its author RainDog Apr 2014 #67

I'm really impressed. Posts like yours usually come... Democracyinkind Apr 2014 #69

This message was self-deleted by its author RainDog Apr 2014 #70

If you see the word "scientism".... AlbertCat Apr 2014 #28

I always wonder why people seem to think that physicality makes things less real. dorkulon Apr 2014 #31

That is pseudoscience MattBaggins Apr 2014 #39

Sorry, All Scientists are Materialists when doing Science cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #53

DU Rec...nt SidDithers Apr 2014 #2

Great post. One more thing I'd add that isn't pseudoscience or "woo"... Silent3 Apr 2014 #3

I've been trying to remember a word for the past few days, and I just did: Iatrogenic Electric Monk Apr 2014 #5

Your point being what? Silent3 Apr 2014 #10

Wow, you make a lot of assumptions. My point was, mainstream modern medicine still has faults. nt Electric Monk Apr 2014 #12

If I walked up to you out of the blue and said, "two plus two equals four"... Silent3 Apr 2014 #13

I was basically agreeing with you, and introducing you (and others) to a new word Electric Monk Apr 2014 #15

Except science is, for the most part, self-correcting. Archae Apr 2014 #14

That people die? MattBaggins Apr 2014 #40

That there is a small percentage of people who end up worse off, not better, for having seen an MD. Electric Monk Apr 2014 #41

What does that have to do with the topic of pseudoscience? MattBaggins Apr 2014 #43

My example: Although this is not an illness per se - truedelphi Apr 2014 #18

A form of white coat phenomenon MattBaggins Apr 2014 #45

White coat phenomona is well known Sgent Apr 2014 #52

I'm not sure that really applies. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Apr 2014 #36

Also that actual hospitals take responsibility for their patients MattBaggins Apr 2014 #42

dead horse already!!!! 2pooped2pop Apr 2014 #6

Nope, not nearly dead enough yet. :) n/t Silent3 Apr 2014 #19

I say keep beating that one until it woos no more... Democracyinkind Apr 2014 #57

Very well said. K&R LadyHawkAZ Apr 2014 #7

I can't believe we still need to have conversations like this on DU... mike_c Apr 2014 #8

I'd also add that empirical practices are not woo eridani Apr 2014 #16

Thanks eridani. truedelphi Apr 2014 #21

That was just a made-up example eridani Apr 2014 #23

Here are some considerations for anyone here examining "woo" vs "non-woo" science truedelphi Apr 2014 #17

I don't think this has anything to do with pseudoscience or "woo" caraher Apr 2014 #76

It doesn't seem to me that you read my discussion, or if you read it, truedelphi Apr 2014 #79

I wrote relative to the point of the OP caraher Apr 2014 #84

Heres an analogy - truedelphi Apr 2014 #86

Research that indicates Conservatives have compassion and ethics is clearly pseudoscience nikto Apr 2014 #20

You have made my day with this post. TxDemChem Apr 2014 #22

This is excerpted from another thread: bvar22 Apr 2014 #25

we can call it the "bad boyfriend" model of science: his word is law and eternal, and he can MisterP Apr 2014 #26

And we went over this there too. NuclearDem Apr 2014 #33

I read your posts, and understand you perfectly. bvar22 Apr 2014 #34

They aren't chasing "woo." They're chasing possible treatments. NuclearDem Apr 2014 #37

Everything is "Woo".... until it isn't. bvar22 Apr 2014 #44

Just completely false MattBaggins Apr 2014 #47

No, science doesn't begin with pseudoscience. NuclearDem Apr 2014 #49

Oh good god .... etherealtruth Apr 2014 #51

You are really totally missing the point. nt Democracyinkind Apr 2014 #58

Testing botanicasl and looking for naturally occuring compounds is not woo MattBaggins Apr 2014 #46

A lot of discussion revolves around medicine. But medicine is not science; it is technology. FarCenter Apr 2014 #32

The interpretations and conclusions from the lackluster MattBaggins Apr 2014 #38

This! Democracyinkind Apr 2014 #54

Some Examples of Pseudoscience - Crop Circles, UFO Phenomena, Astrology, Agnosticsherbet Apr 2014 #60

To put it more simply.... uppityperson Apr 2014 #62

Bwahahahaha NuclearDem Apr 2014 #65

About 30 + years ago I Phlem Apr 2014 #64

Example of pseudoscience RobertEarl Apr 2014 #71

That's not an example of pseudoscience. NuclearDem Apr 2014 #72

From your OP RobertEarl Apr 2014 #73

What about the study of nuclear decay is pseudoscience? NuclearDem Apr 2014 #74

From the OP RobertEarl Apr 2014 #75

What the fuck are you talking about? NuclearDem Apr 2014 #77

See? RobertEarl Apr 2014 #78

Robert, give it a rest. NuclearDem Apr 2014 #81

Maybe wiki will educate you? RobertEarl Apr 2014 #82

This is fantastic stuff! NuclearDem Apr 2014 #83

God is woo. GeorgeGist Apr 2014 #80