EDIT: Let’s cool it with the downvotes, dudes. We’re not out to cut funding to your black hole detection chamber or revoke the degrees of chiropractors just because a couple of us don’t believe in it, okay? Chill out, participate with the prompt and continue with having a nice day. I’m sure almost everybody has something to add.

  • I disagree. Science is making models to explain the data and testing them. Whichever model fits best the data becomes a leading theory. There is no belief whatsoever.

    This aside, I agree with you that many people tend to mistake scientific theories for reality, they are merely good models. Thinking otherwise is belief.

    Let’s say the universe is a clock that we can’t open. Even if we make a perfect model that predicts the exact motion of the hands, it doesn’t tell us anything about what is inside the clock (it could be anything really). Belief is when you start believing your model IS what is inside the clock.

    • @dumpsterlid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I understand that this is a nice way to teach kids how science works, but if you don’t think belief factors into every single thing that humans do in science you are massively off the mark.

      Without belief or intuition, it’s just data.

      • Even if belief is very present in human nature, the scientific method is not a form of belief because it is just selectionning the model that fits best the data.

        Coming up with models does not necessarily require intuition either when we can automate this process.

        Belief is human, but science is universal.

      • @tiny_electron@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        0
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Religion is not a theory because it cannot be falsified.

        And the theory of evolution is not belief as it can be observed in real time in labs with flies for exemple.

        Your equality is therefore incorrect.

        Edit: typo

        • @freeindv
          link
          01 year ago

          the theory of evolution is not belief as it can be observed in real time in labs with files for exemple.

          I don’t believe that’s the same effect we see in humans

          • I agree it is not straightforward. Evolution arises from gene reproduction, flies are just one easy example because they reproduce very fast. Humans are also using genes reproduction and our evolution can be also be traced. The evidence for evolution is everywhere and it is the simplest explanation that fits all the data.

            • @freeindv
              link
              01 year ago

              Why do you believe that humans act the same way flies do?

              • Flies are very different than humans, but they are built using the same building blocks and processes.

                It is not belief it is observation: humans are composed of cells that contain chromosomes. Genetic data is mixed with errors during reproduction (both with flies and humans) resulting in different characteristics in the individuals of the next generation (observable with flies and humans)

                Sexual attactiveness of individuals will depend on their genes and their environment (also based on observation), which will impact their number of offspring, effectively selecting some genes and discarding others.

                All of this is based on simple observation and you sée that belief has no place in this line of reasoning.

                Of course there is more to flies and humans than evolution, yet evolution is such a simple process that it applies to both! Nature is truly amazing

                • @freeindv
                  link
                  01 year ago

                  That’s an interesting theory, but I do not believe it to be true

                  • Where do you see belief in what I explained? I’m genuinely curious.

                    It can’t be the observations as you can make them for yourself, and you cannot find a model that fits the data better with less assumptions as it already fits the data perfectly and has no assumption beyond “organisms make copy of themselves with mutations”

                    Then what is it?