How to fight against metaphysics and pseudoscience?

AI Thread Summary
Fighting against metaphysics and pseudoscience requires a tailored approach based on the specific arguments presented. Engaging with those misled by pseudoscience should focus on rational discourse, while acknowledging one's own limitations in knowledge. Many individuals cling to pseudoscientific beliefs due to a deep-seated need for faith, making it crucial to respect their perspectives rather than dismiss them outright. Effective communication involves guiding them towards credible information without resorting to insults or aggressive tactics. Ultimately, fostering an environment of curiosity and respect can encourage individuals to explore and question their beliefs more critically.
  • #51
Crazy Tosser said:
The rest of you need to work on your temper and tolerance.

If you were, indeed, kidding, then my apologies for not recognizing it. I do, however, stand by my quoted comments. Neither was intended as an attack upon your beliefs, whether or not they were real; I was merely pointing out that science has no room for personal opinions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52
arunma said:
Wait...what? Quantum mechanics is perhaps the most widely tested and verified of all scientific theories. If anything should be called "physics," it's quantum mechanics, which is the basis of many modern research areas in physics (condensed matter, nuclear/particle, etc.). Why would one refer to quantum mechanics as metaphysics? Quantum mechanics is not philosophy, it's science.

If we discuss quantum mechanics itself, it is impossible to avoid turmoil.
so this forum restrict that kind of dispute.
I do not want to discuss that problem deeply in this forum.
 
Last edited:
  • #53
"The notion that people will give up irrational beliefs when presented with solid evidence is itself an irrational belief, unsupported by the evidence" - George Lakoff

Case in point, as others have said, creationists, 9/11 truthers, holocaust deniers, you name it. The fact that you are arguing against their beliefs means that you won't be taken as honest. There is only one way to handle people who copy/past mindless drivel about such topics; copy/paste a pre-written refutation and be done with it. You will rarely get through to the true believers -- it is all a matter of protecting the innocent minds of others.
 
  • #54
Moridin said:
"The notion that people will give up irrational beliefs when presented with solid evidence is itself an irrational belief, unsupported by the evidence" - George Lakoff

Case in point, as others have said, creationists, 9/11 truthers, holocaust deniers, you name it. The fact that you are arguing against their beliefs means that you won't be taken as honest. There is only one way to handle people who copy/past mindless drivel about such topics; copy/paste a pre-written refutation and be done with it. You will rarely get through to the true believers -- it is all a matter of protecting the innocent minds of others.

My best friend has a penchant for picking up on controversial ideas and opinions such as 9/11 conspiracies and the hoax theory of the moon landing. If I were to have not taken properly educating him seriously he might still believe in a lot of this drivel. Every 'true believer' convinces at least a few people.
 
Back
Top