|
Top-level
 @georgepotter I feel like you're not responding to my point, which is that experts in the field (such as psychologists) would disagree with your strong claim of "entirely racist pseudoscience". Do you consider psychology itself to be pseudoscience? My quote is of course sourced, I link to Wikipedia because it's easy to read. I don't really care about whether you or I feel like we were tested on "culture", I care about scientific studies and consensus. 4 comments
@makeworld For 18 months the WHO insisted COVID wasn't airborne based on erroneous received wisdom that had been copied into medical textbooks for so long that nobody had bothered to verify it. They ignored experts and modern research in favour of a citation-free assertion they'd all learned so long ago they couldn't even remember where, confident that it must be scientific fact. Then it turned out that the source of that assertion had simply misunderstood a rival's research. @makeworld actual science, raw science, the scientific method, all of that, are robust and verifiable and the most trustworthy thing we've got. Science, as in the community of a flawed bunch of humans, operating within cultures and institutions, is absolutely not robust and trustworthy until and unless evidence can be provided. Groupthink, bias and logical fallacies happen just as much to educated people as to uneducated ones.  @georgepotter @makeworld now kiss. Tbh I think you agree with each other, you’re just both talking past each other |
Gregory's Server
@makeworld if you've got a better citation than a quote from Wikipedia then please provide it.
I don't think psychology is a pseudoscience, but I have enough of a grounding in scientific literacy and history to know better than to think that any consensus is robust unless it's supported by evidence. If medical racism is a thing (which it definitely is) then you'd have to be an idiot to blindly trust that received academic wisdom is correct.