Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Speaking of concepts where CLEAR definitions

  1. Jun 5, 2009 #1
    Was in the shower and I was thinking of this conversation I was having. They were completely ignorant to things as they really are. Instead they took them as how they THINK they are. i.e. science.

    I assume he does this so that the concepts can fit to whatever he is arguing for or so that he can argue against them more easily. Is this unethical?

    Does being happy with your thoughts take precedent over reality.

    I'm not going into issues where semantics will come into play I'm speaking of concepts where CLEAR definitions are laid out such as scientific method. Someone can alter it, or simplify it to the point where it doesn't even make sense any more but it's no longer the same method they just think it is...
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 5, 2009 #2

    JaredJames

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    Look at religion, they are all split into various different groups of believers, they all interpret the 'stories' in various ways. Thats why people of the same religion end up having radically different beliefs. Just look at how many different Christian sects there are.

    It's human nature to look only for what you want to see. No matter how many facts you are presented with, you will automatically disregard them until you find something to support your argument, regardless of how extreme/unbelievable. That's something scientists need to work against, they cannot afford to have these biases and require an open mind.

    I consider myself a very open minded person, and always consider all facts presented to me equally (providing they are reputable). I seem to find myself constantly altering my own opinions as new information becomes available. It has become clear to me that as long as establishments, particularly the media, keep spewing out so called 'facts' with little or no scientific basis purely to get ratings, there is no chance for the public to form an unbiased and fair opinion (take nuclear energy as an example, people are against because of the news reports on Chernobyl giving 'dodgy' info at best without proper research etc.), and therefore it can be extremely difficult for scientists to educate people on those subjects, as all facts shown are either disregarded or twisted by the anti-(whatever) campaign to suit their cause.

    Jared
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2009
  4. Jun 5, 2009 #3
    Re: Ignorance

    Uh, I'm not really sure what you're talking about. Without some context of the conversation you were having, the topic of "ignorance" could be interpreted in quite a few different ways.
     
  5. Jun 5, 2009 #4

    JaredJames

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    I do agree there, I believe they are going for something along the lines of:
    People have their own beliefs and opinions on various subjects. Some people who have very strong beliefs/opinions can disregard facts/new evidence which disproves them or can even twist/edit them as necessary to provide more evidence for themselves, taking the original statement out of context and making it fit their scenario.

    Jared
     
  6. Jun 5, 2009 #5

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    I'm not even sure why he was having a conversation with someone while in the shower. :uhh: Or that's what the description sounded like. Context would really help here.
     
  7. Jun 5, 2009 #6

    Math Is Hard

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    The mangled pronouns aren't helping.
     
  8. Jun 5, 2009 #7

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    You are asking if it is unethical to take scientific principles or facts out of context, or to misstate them, in order to support the beliefs that one already has?
     
  9. Jun 5, 2009 #8
    Re: Ignorance


    I actually disagree with you. I think bias is important(as long as there are several competing ones), especially in intellectual communities.

    I mean, if Einstein and Bohr did not have their dogmatic deterministic and probabilistic biased beliefs, we may not have Quantum mechanics.

    Also, if we did not have biased political think tanks, no one will be that constant watch dog of the other party in influence.

    If we did not have strong theological bias(excluding,of course, any violence stemming out of religious extremism), there would be no need to have a complex theological system and religion would be literally as simple and boring as "cause' the Pope said so."
     
  10. Jun 5, 2009 #9

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    What?

    Seriously, what on God's green earth are you talking about? Are you talking to yourself in the shower? Is your shampoo an unethical thinker?
     
  11. Jun 5, 2009 #10
    Re: Ignorance

    :rofl:

    I think he was just thinking about the conversation he had earlier that day. Do people not think while they shower?

    No.

    Ignorant/fool can only influence another ignorant/fool IMO. I tend to stay away from those kind of people.
     
  12. Jun 5, 2009 #11
    Re: Ignorance

    I knew this guy once. Why would he do this though. Maybe it was so he could get there. But I don't think so.

    Wait what.
     
  13. Jun 5, 2009 #12

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    omg I think I used to date that guy.
     
  14. Jun 5, 2009 #13

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    Exactly! It's just like how society elevates political leaders to be superhuman. The structure of society needs to take on a more dynamic system where we integrate leaders with those people who choose said leadership.

    Wait what.
     
  15. Jun 5, 2009 #14

    Math Is Hard

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    I don't know about its thoughts, but sometimes I think my shampoo just tells me what I want to hear. Is that ethical?

    shamp.jpg
     
  16. Jun 5, 2009 #15

    Borg

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

    Are you saying that the Irish Spring maidens are going to show up either?
     
  17. Jun 5, 2009 #16
    Re: Ignorance

    We should not allow ourselves to be crammed into this rat maze. We should not submit to dehumanization. We have got to realize we're being conditioned on a mass scale.

    Wait what.
     
  18. Jun 5, 2009 #17

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    Right. I am not a number, but if I were, I would be a rational number

    Wait what.
     
  19. Jun 5, 2009 #18

    JaredJames

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    Yes bias is good, and it is needed, however what I meant was that it cannot be allowed to prevent progress. As in, just because one scientist has a particular belief, (s)he cannot take that belief and no matter what new research is done and what theories are put forward, they still maintain their belief and disregard all new evidence. Or, even to interpret the facts in a way which supports their theory despite having no relevance on the subject.

    Given the current state of our politics (in the UK), what with mp expenses and such. How can you make this statement? The MPs pay and expenses are ultimately controlled by legislation written by the MPs themselves. Self regulation if you like. And as was pointed out recently, there is nothing the public can do about it until an election.

    With regards to this, I wasn't pointing out relgious bias as such, but more the ability of religous people to read the same text and interpret it in their own way. Purely an example of a situation where people can twist and alter facts (not that I consider any religious text as fact), to suit their needs, (see doucmentary by Louis Theroux: The Most Hated Family in America).

    Basically, as I pointed out above, people will believe what they want to believe if it supports their cause. I never understand how, regardless of the evidence set in front of them, no matter how strong it may be, a person will stick to what they believe, especially if it is a faith based belief, (aka creationism).

    Jared
     
  20. Jun 5, 2009 #19

    Math Is Hard

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Ignorance

    I can see how you would opt for that. Post-modernist deconstructionist reinterpretation theory tells us that we're not really cognizant of any of these toxic innuendos in mathematics that we subconsciously process in our classroom lessons. Even if we vaguely are, we may not fully appreciate the anti-feminist, even racist bias, with rational numbers clearly being labeled as masculine, and irrational numbers as feminine/minority numbers, that erodes our social view of gender and "other", and may take us years of therapy to overcome. This is clearly Freudian penis envy.

    Wait what?
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2009
  21. Jun 5, 2009 #20
    Re: Ignorance

    Well then I can see the majority of the people who replied would rather attempt to make me a fool and redicule. Well done guys. I applaud you, seriously, you got me looking quite stupid over here.

    Anyways. Yes as the other people have noticed I was speaking of IGNORANCE being UNETHICAL not my shampoo.

    I think that ignorance occurs when people place their happiness above the continued sucess of humanity. This occurs frequently in religion (read Nietzche regarding this) but it also occurs in the general community such as with global warming. Some people will just be ignorant continually and allow global warming to get out of hand.

    So I think ignorance in most cases is unethical.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Speaking of concepts where CLEAR definitions
  1. Public speaking (Replies: 32)

  2. Kid Speak (Replies: 31)

  3. Text speak (Replies: 76)

  4. Speak Hungarian? (Replies: 9)

Loading...