8 years ago
5
A rational nation ruled by science would be a terrible idea
Neil deGrasse Tyson imagines a country called Rationalia, a society where policy is based on the weight of evidence. That's a bad idea, says Jeffrey Guhin.
Continue Reading https://www.newscientist.com
Join the Discussion
I'd rather be ruled by science than by the religious any day of the week.
No kidding. Apparently science has no business telling people how to live, but religion is better?
They think they are.I'm so sick of them trying to tell the world who they can love, if/when they can have sex, controlling women,denying people pleasure and compassionate ends to suffering...I can go on and on.
"Scientists can’t tell us if it’s right to kill a baby with a developmental disability, despite how well they might marshal evidence about the baby’s life prospects or her capacity to think or move on her own."
Science is a method of gathering evidence to confirm or disprove a hypothesis. In no way is science a method of determining the value of a life. A hypothesis can be proven or disproven with evidence. If that can't be done you're not doing science. The value of a life and other questions without quantifiable answers are to be discussed in philosophy. Fact-based policy will prevent policy makers from banning "assault weapon looking" guns when they mean to ban those with high fire rate. A rational science driven society would mean policy based on data not, an anti-humanist movement to destroy diginity which is what this article seems to be implying.
Edit: A ton of tiny typos
The "weight of evidence" is oft transient.