IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 18th December 2023, 11:17 PM   #561
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 15,993
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Okay, fine whatever you got me.

Would it help if you mentally substitute a dull "I agree" for the contentious post?
That wouldn't only help, it would solve the entire issue on my side.

Sometimes I can be annoyingly adamant about apparently minor points. I recall once arguing with a friend of mine for 2 hours until I finally got annoyed and said, "look, I actually know what you're trying to say, which is this...", then summed up his view, and he agreed that it was his view. I finished with: "And I agree with all of that."
"Then what's your problem?!" he replied.
"My problem is it's not what you actually did say! And the thing you did say is wrong!"

I think he was understandably annoyed.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th December 2023, 08:50 AM   #562
Paul2
Philosopher
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,166
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
They may be what you're talking about, and what Dawkins and Coyne are talking about, but unless it can be demonstrated that they are actually impinging on science education, they don't need to be talked about.
I can’t see why one can’t talk about the potential for a problem, especially given a definable route (the holistic nature of MM).

This is a discussion forum designed for people to talk about things.
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th December 2023, 09:03 AM   #563
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,527
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
They may be what you're talking about, and what Dawkins and Coyne are talking about, but unless it can be demonstrated that they are actually impinging on science education, they don't need to be talked about.
I for one would like to normalize needing to talk about things *before* they start impinging on science education. That way, if it turns out they *could* impinge on science education, we have a chance of noticing and preventing the harm, rather than having to try to remedy the harm after it has occurred.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th December 2023, 12:47 PM   #564
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Present
Posts: 9,278
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I for one would like to normalize needing to talk about things *before* they start impinging on science education. That way, if it turns out they *could* impinge on science education, we have a chance of noticing and preventing the harm, rather than having to try to remedy the harm after it has occurred.
Prevention is better than cure.
__________________
Paranormal/supernatural beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a god’s existence have been greatly exaggerated.
Make beliefs truths and you get make-believe truths.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th December 2023, 04:17 PM   #565
Mike Helland
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 4,617
Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post
This is a discussion forum designed for people to talk about things.
So, like.. what's actually being discussed?

And what's the big idea, anyways?

That kids can only be taught things that we believe are true, and they should trust what they are taught is true, and they should reject the ideas that we reject?

That's no way to prepare a person for a real world. And it's basically the classic human folly that whatever you believe is right, and the world will be a better place is everyone agrees with you.

Objectively, being a xenophobe is worse than being a xenophile. And being a critical thinker is better than being able to recite a desired answer.
__________________
I'm not entirely sure what I'm talking about, but based on what little I know, the above seemed like a reasonable thing to say. Thank you in advance for any corrections.
Mike Helland is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th December 2023, 04:40 PM   #566
Paul2
Philosopher
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,166
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
So, like.. what's actually being discussed?

And what's the big idea, anyways?

That kids can only be taught things that we believe are true, and they should trust what they are taught is true, and they should reject the ideas that we reject?
While it doesn't happen much, the best thing would be to teach kids how to figure out what is true.
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
That's no way to prepare a person for a real world. And it's basically the classic human folly that whatever you believe is right, and the world will be a better place is everyone agrees with you.
It's pretty important to teach kids what our best knowledge is, so they can benefit from it, expand on it, and change it when needed.
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
Objectively, being a xenophobe is worse than being a xenophile. And being a critical thinker is better than being able to recite a desired answer.
Both critical thinking and reciting correct answers are important.
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2023, 05:19 AM   #567
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 113,765
Mod WarningThe topic of the thread is not each other so drop the personalisation.
Responding to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By:Darat
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th February 2024, 04:29 AM   #568
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
 
Graham2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,692
This paper, which is reader access only on the website of Science magazine seems to be the latest broadside in the push to braid 'Indigenous' and 'Western' Science, the authors are from New Zealand the country that has pioneered this movement.


Here is the abstract in full.


Quote:
Conflict has grown around Indigenous knowledge in education policy. There has been growing acceptance of the value of Indigenous knowledge for promoting ecological resilience, transformational approaches in stewardship, and cultural renewal within global fora such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. However, despite increasing acceptance at a strategic high level in science-informed policy, there is often a lack of wider acceptance, application, and policy protections of Indigenous knowledge transmission in more local settings, including opposition by some scientists. We argue that Indigenous knowledge can complement and enhance science teachings, benefitting students and society in a time of considerable global challenges. We do not argue that Indigenous knowledge should usurp the role of, or be called, science. But to step from “not science” to “therefore not as (or at all) valuable and worthy of learning” is a non sequitur, based on personal values and not a scientifically defensible position.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adi9606
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!"
'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail

Everybody gets it wrong sometimes...
Graham2001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th February 2024, 11:11 AM   #569
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 34,924
Originally Posted by Graham2001 View Post
This paper, which is reader access only on the website of Science magazine seems to be the latest broadside in the push to braid 'Indigenous' and 'Western' Science, the authors are from New Zealand the country that has pioneered this movement.
Thanks - I'm going to unpack that a bit:

Quote:
There has been growing acceptance of the value of Indigenous knowledge for promoting ecological resilience, transformational approaches in stewardship, and cultural renewal within global fora such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Pure drivel, and cynically so.

The IPCC indeed respects Indigenous and Local Knowledge (ILK) because it makes a lot of sense to listen to farmers and people who work the land. That is what the IPCC says when it discusses the point: https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/chapter/chapter-7/

What they don't do is listen to mumbo-jumbo just-so stories passed on around the campfire. Maori had no thought of preserving the environment or even their food source, being responsible for the denuding of our forests and extinction of their important food source in moa.

We know what happens when Maori are given the opportunity to lead conservation efforts: kelp barrens.

Or maybe the bloke who's just been allowed to sue oil companies for failing to protect Maori from climate change? You know, Mike Smith, most famous for cutting down a tree.

Quote:
We argue that Indigenous knowledge can complement and enhance science teachings, benefitting students and society in a time of considerable global challenges.
Of, course, there's no mention of what that knowledge is in relation to maori.

Quote:
We do not argue that Indigenous knowledge should usurp the role of, or be called, science. But to step from “not science” to “therefore not as (or at all) valuable and worthy of learning” is a non sequitur, based on personal values and not a scientifically defensible position.
How quaint to point at a logical fallacy while using one themselves. Nobody is saying that ILK is useless or not worth knowing - what isn't worth knowing is the baloney spouted by people like Mike King and Hone Harawira, two career criminals with a personal agenda.

If it's something worth knowing, then it can be backed up with reason. That's now what Maori are asking for.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th February 2024, 07:02 PM   #570
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Present
Posts: 9,278
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Thanks - I'm going to unpack that a bit:



Pure drivel, and cynically so.

The IPCC indeed respects Indigenous and Local Knowledge (ILK) because it makes a lot of sense to listen to farmers and people who work the land. That is what the IPCC says when it discusses the point: https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/chapter/chapter-7/

What they don't do is listen to mumbo-jumbo just-so stories passed on around the campfire. Maori had no thought of preserving the environment or even their food source, being responsible for the denuding of our forests and extinction of their important food source in moa.

We know what happens when Maori are given the opportunity to lead conservation efforts: kelp barrens.

Or maybe the bloke who's just been allowed to sue oil companies for failing to protect Maori from climate change? You know, Mike Smith, most famous for cutting down a tree.



Of, course, there's no mention of what that knowledge is in relation to maori.



How quaint to point at a logical fallacy while using one themselves. Nobody is saying that ILK is useless or not worth knowing - what isn't worth knowing is the baloney spouted by people like Mike King and Hone Harawira, two career criminals with a personal agenda.

If it's something worth knowing, then it can be backed up with reason. That's now what Maori are asking for.
I assume you meant not?
__________________
Paranormal/supernatural beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a god’s existence have been greatly exaggerated.
Make beliefs truths and you get make-believe truths.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2024, 02:15 AM   #571
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 34,924
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
I assume you meant not?
Yes - good spot. Past edit time, unfortunately.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:04 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.