![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
sophia-sadek.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsScience and religion appear to be at loggerheads with scientists inquiring into topics that the minions of the material Creator claim as their own domain. On the other hand, there are people who profess to advocate science, but who approach it as if it were a religion. Roman despots are not nearly as detrimental to the pursuit of inquiry as are "scientists" with an economic interest in their pet theories. The latter class of people form a caste of priests who jealously guard the magic formulas for their chemical communion wafers. Scientific inquiry that threatens their monopoly is rejected out of hand and tarred with the label of a Hollywood cult.
Imagine a group of people with little knowledge of electronics. As they investigate the operation of a computer, they discover that interfering with the circuitry causes a malfunction. They establish a "scientific" theory that all malfunctions stem from circuit failures. They find ways to "treat" a faulty machine by inducing a secondary fault that does not fix the machine, but makes the primary fault less striking. The machine malfunctions, but the "treatment" of inducing a secondary fault causes the machine to malfunction in a more graceful manner.
Another group of people approach the machine using a different tack. Rather than trying to determine its failures, they seek to determine its capabilities. These people want to know how to use the computer for higher purposes than as consumers of fault injection methods. They work with it to find ways of improving its use. They modify its programming to have it perform miraculously. Naturally, their successes are sneered at by the fault injection specialists. Improvement in capability can only occur as a result of circuit failure. These highly performing machines are to be treated with fault injections to make them more "normal."
There is more to a computer than electronic circuitry. Likewise, there is more to the nervous system than neurons. This may seem obvious to lay people who espouse the notion of a magical entity that will outlast the decay of the neurons, but it seems counter-intuitive to people who have been indoctrinated into bio-chemical dogma. Of course, there is a third group of people who buy into neither magical craft. These people are faithless in the eyes of the former and unscientific in the eyes of the latter. Some even think of them as followers of L. Ron Hubbard despite a lack of any logical connection.
The pill bottle priesthood is a powerful lobby in the halls of governance. They have ties to the military and to law enforcement as well. Do you have experience with any chemical communion?
Imagine a group of people with little knowledge of electronics. As they investigate the operation of a computer, they discover that interfering with the circuitry causes a malfunction. They establish a "scientific" theory that all malfunctions stem from circuit failures. They find ways to "treat" a faulty machine by inducing a secondary fault that does not fix the machine, but makes the primary fault less striking. The machine malfunctions, but the "treatment" of inducing a secondary fault causes the machine to malfunction in a more graceful manner.
Another group of people approach the machine using a different tack. Rather than trying to determine its failures, they seek to determine its capabilities. These people want to know how to use the computer for higher purposes than as consumers of fault injection methods. They work with it to find ways of improving its use. They modify its programming to have it perform miraculously. Naturally, their successes are sneered at by the fault injection specialists. Improvement in capability can only occur as a result of circuit failure. These highly performing machines are to be treated with fault injections to make them more "normal."
There is more to a computer than electronic circuitry. Likewise, there is more to the nervous system than neurons. This may seem obvious to lay people who espouse the notion of a magical entity that will outlast the decay of the neurons, but it seems counter-intuitive to people who have been indoctrinated into bio-chemical dogma. Of course, there is a third group of people who buy into neither magical craft. These people are faithless in the eyes of the former and unscientific in the eyes of the latter. Some even think of them as followers of L. Ron Hubbard despite a lack of any logical connection.
The pill bottle priesthood is a powerful lobby in the halls of governance. They have ties to the military and to law enforcement as well. Do you have experience with any chemical communion?
(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 02:25 (UTC)just saying
/thread
Date: 29/2/12 02:40 (UTC)Subsequently, you may now feel secure in knowing you do not believe me because instead of creating a peer reviewed study to back up an opinion comment, I've chosen to let it go, call you "the winner" and move on to other threads and life in general.
Congratulations :) *golf clap* I lose ~
(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 02:45 (UTC)reports of incidents like you are referring to didn't really become nationwide news until the advent of the web and more widespread REPORTING of NON-LOCAL NEWS INCIDENTS
much like school shootings
carry on doing your thing, dude but please try to think critically and refrain from scapegoating
thanks in advance
(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 02:47 (UTC)increase in reports of a crime doesn't always mean an increase in said crime
(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 03:00 (UTC)btw you never actually proved me wrong.
here is a nice peer reviewed study that showed about 50% of homicide perps were intoxicated on something when the committed the crime.
http://www.jaapl.org/content/22/1/133.full.pdf
and google IATROGENOCIDE while you are at it. Really think you should quit while you are winning.
(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 03:12 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 03:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 18:00 (UTC)b. that's nice but we weren't talking about 'one murder is too many'
(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 03:14 (UTC)one more time
correlation is not causation
(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 03:52 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 18:02 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 16:46 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 29/2/12 18:01 (UTC)