Originally Posted by verisimilidude
Lately I've noticed that many "snake oil salesmen" have come with some rather impressive credentials, such as the Nobel Prize, National Medal of Science, and professor positions at major universities. I won't mention names, but they're readily available by a search engine inquiry.
This is a scary trend. I've seen several associated with many "miracle cure" type of products with little or no scientific support.
Is their association simply motivated primarily by financial gain? In the long run, wouldn't the loss of respect and credibility among their peers offset any short term economic benefit?
How is a layperson expected to discern between academics who remain committed to the scientific method and those who sell out to embrace more mundane incentives?
Perhaps you are, in part, referring to the Nobel winner who touted vitamin C as a cure-all?
His problem was it wasn't his area of expertise. Another scientist in Engineering at Princeton was out of his depth when controls were lax on his "anomalous phenomena" studies. Not to mention some scientists that become completely schwartzed.
its quite a thing really, to feel that you are capable to criticize the actions of someone who has more knowledge than yourself, someone with "impressive" credentials, simply because these more erudite scholars challenge your basic world view - how can your knowledge possibly evolve if you cannot even have a little respect for people that are smarter and more accomplished than you?
if you were a true rationalist, then you would have to have an open mind until you could find that specific flaw in their logic operation that yields material results that do not correspond with said logical operation
however, as we see on this list, even such objective evidence is conveniently ignored, simply because it doesn't conform the mathematical assumptions of some statistical model that your apparently most erudite follow, i might guess, even in matters of the heart
it seem to me, that most skeptics are not rationalists at all - they are fundamentalists - the taliban of thought
the thing is, most haven't a clue how to apply Aristotle's three laws of thought, nor are able to see the inherent problem with them, especially with the first law, the law of identity
mathematicians love to claim that they can explain Zeno's paradoxes, but many of these remain unsolved, not because they cannot per se solved mathematically per se, but because those who try to solve apparently have no capacity to comprehend something called "context", and the true intent behind them
since rationality extends from the logic of Aristotle, a deeper investigation into the views of his antecedents would seem appropriate: of course Plato and Socrates, but most importantly, the elder Parmenides
what is clear is that on this forum, is that the what Parmenides called the "Way of Opinion" dominates the thinking here: no end to constant argumentation
i invite rationalists to probe the nature of their own consciousness, and observe the nature of perception itself - skeptics will probably be too skeptical to even try - they are hopeless cases and when they die will have only the confusion of the loss of their body to contemplate
for those who are reasonable, don't try to think or argue your way our of this - just sit, and observe the function of perception, and make it a practice - 30 minutes in the morning after you wake
during this time, let go of your assumptions, and indeed, any attachment to any thought - if you need to focus on something, just focus on your breath - nothing else
and when you do this, when you behold the nature of perception itself, you may for a moment discover the alternative to the Way of Opinion, what Parmenides called "The Way of Truth"
in this mind, you will be more careful about your opinions, perhaps a little more humble and less likely to jump to conclusions about things that you have to be honest about, that you don't
really know
i know i will be flamed for this, but i offer it the spirit it is given, for one brief moment consider it a détente
but for those that persist in their opinions that their believes exist as some kind of independent truth, as "fact" - i will continue, until it no longer amuses me, to pop them as i would an effervescent bubble , "full or sound and fury, signifying nothing"
have a happy life, and hopefully, a good death too
