Page 1 of 3
#1
Why is it that even though theories in the natural and human sciences are only right because they have not been disproven are so convincing?
For example t in school science text books often present theories in such a manner that they seem completely true, although they might be wrong and be replaced in 10, 50 or 100 years?
I just wonder why those theories get so much credit (for example big bang theory) although there are many possibilities that they might be wrong.
#2
Cos they're the closest thing we have to being correct thus far.
dirtbag ballet by the bins down the alley
as i walk through the chalet of the shadow of death
everything that you've come to expect


#3
Because there's a lot of evidence to support them. There are many possibilities that you're a total asshole, but until I see evidence of it I won't assume it.
Quote by Fat Lard
Why would you spend tens of thousands of dollars to learn about a language you already speak? It was over before it even started dude

Quote by captainsnazz
brot pls
#5
Quote by LostLegion
What other possibilities would the Big Bang Theory have besides a shit show?


I don't know what you're talking about dude, that show rules.
#6
You have to believe in some things just to get along in life. There's a lot of evidence for various scientific theories, so it's reasonable to assume they're probably right and live your life accordingly.
Up The Boro!
#7
What I also mean is that most people do not really know the details of complex theories, but they just assume that those theories are right.
#8
I don't trust theories, and that's that.
Save a trip to the RT!
Quote by blake1221
If there's anything to take away from this thread, anything at all, it's to always cup the balls.


Top trolling abilities.

Quote by caeser1156
God dammit you had me 10/10
#9
Quote by guitarmaniac88
I don't trust theories, and that's that.


You do realise pretty much everything we know about the universe and how it works is theory. Literally almost everything.
dirtbag ballet by the bins down the alley
as i walk through the chalet of the shadow of death
everything that you've come to expect


#11
Theories are explanations of the observerable natural phenomena. Interpretations of data used to explain observed phenomena and to predict future behaviour of a natural phenomena. If the theory cannot predict or fails to explain new evidence, it fails. If it can explain and predict new phenomena, it is a strong theory.

I trust scientific theories because they are re tested and peer reviewed and explain the natural world very very accurately. The great thing about science is that it always self corrects, and always incorporates new evidence to explain the natural world.

Case in point, Darwin did not know about DNA, yet he showed evolution occurs. When we discovered DNA, we could show the mechanism of evolution. It went from a good theory to an excellent, waterproof theory that is currently undisputable.

Edit:

(Good) Scientists tend not to believe in theories. They tend to use them as explanations to how and why. Faith has no place in science because faith is not logical. Belief is not something I would use to describe why a theory is. If it stands on its own evidence, I dont need to believe in it, it just is.
Sat in a lab, curing diseases. They actually LET me play with chemicals!
Last edited by Guitardude19 at Jan 7, 2012,
#13
Better question: When did teachers start sucking at explaining basic fundamentals of science?
In my heart I'm with you

every night
#14
People like to have something to believe in. its just like faith with religion. regardless of whether its true or not, it gives people answers.
#15
They've done a damn good job of explaining what we see and also enabling us to predict things.
I shall grant you three wishes.

None of which will work.


Does the above post enrage, offend or confuse you?

Good.


I like my women how I like my guitars. Curvy and like it when I finger them.
#16
Quote by guitarmaniac88
I don't trust theories, and that's that.



Scientific theory =/= philosophical theory.
#17
Because they make more sense than the alternative explainations presented to us.
Quote by Cathbard
If all you had to go on was the forum you'd think a Decimator could cure noise caused by dodgey stage lighting and restock the ocean's population of sperm whales
#18
Quote by Tangerineseeker
What I also mean is that most people do not really know the details of complex theories, but they just assume that those theories are right.

Most people put stock in the credentials of those scientists that formulate them, alongside what evidence they can understand for them.

Should I disbelieve theories about quantum physics because I can't understand them to an extended degree? Or would it be better to trust that the educated people who devote their lives to the study of their field have decent idea of what they're doing?
#19
Quote by Guitardude19
Theories are explanations of the observerable natural phenomena. Interpretations of data used to explain observed phenomena and to predict future behaviour of a natural phenomena. If the theory cannot predict or fails to explain new evidence, it fails. If it can explain and predict new phenomena, it is a strong theory.

So because you can see yourself what the theory has predicted, it is more believable for you?
#20
Don't get me wrong, I'm almost as far from a tinfoil hatter as you can get.

But really, how do we really know that theories really have any credibility if the
"evidence" is something we don't fully understand ourselves?

We just have to believe what we're told by scientists. Government-funded scientists. That's almost a little disturbing to me.
#21
The people who come up with those theories are a lot smarter and more devoted to studying scientific matters than I am. It's as simple as that.

If more people thought this way, maybe we'd be able to pass laws to address climate change, instead of every Cletus and Jimbo thinking they can argue against the entire global scientific community because "herp derp it don't feel warmer"
Quote by jakesmellspoo
ooh look at me i'm ERIKLENSHERR and i work at fancy pants desk jobs and wear ties and ply barely legal girls with weed and booze i'm such a classy motherfucker.
#22
Quote by palm mute
Better question: When did teachers start sucking at explaining basic fundamentals of science?


My god, this. People don't even know what the **** a theory is and they still think they're qualified to talk about them.
#23
Quote by Tonganation

Should I disbelieve theories about quantum physics because I can't understand them to an extended degree? Or would it be better to trust that the educated people who devote their lives to the study of their field have decent idea of what they're doing?

Yeah I was wondering about those questions as well.
But I also though that if you do not know much about a theory it is much easier to accept it, than to challenge it. So that makes it easier for those scientists to convince us of their theories. no?
#24
Because in order for a theory to be widely accepted, there has to be very convincing evidence to support that theory. Scientists don't spend their time doing research and experiments for nothing. It's not like they just sit there and make up theories off the top of their head and publish them.
#25
Quote by T.s.e
My god, this. People don't even know what the **** a theory is and they still think they're qualified to talk about them.

How did I get it wrong?
#26
Quote by T.s.e
My god, this. People don't even know what the **** a theory is and they still think they're qualified to talk about them.


What's a theory then?
dirtbag ballet by the bins down the alley
as i walk through the chalet of the shadow of death
everything that you've come to expect


#27
Quote by Tangerineseeker
So because you can see yourself what the theory has predicted, it is more believable for you?


No. As I said in my edit, I wouldnt ascribe the word belief to scientific theories because belief is not logical. If a theory stands on its own, on the observable evidence, I do not need to believe it is true. Its truth just is. Its hard to describe without getting into the debate of what truth is, but if it makes logical sense, and the evidence has been shown to be true to a certain degree of confidence, then it stands on its own. You cant put belief in something like a theory because they are not absolute truths, you have to look at everything in science with a very open mind because you cant know everything. You have to look at the theory as an explanation of the current evidence and be open minded that new evidence may change the perspective. Otherwise, you are putting faith in something, which means you are no longer open to the possibility of new evidence.
Sat in a lab, curing diseases. They actually LET me play with chemicals!
#28
Because, for the most part, they provide accurate predictions about the physical world. In other words, they work. For the most part.
My signature lacks content. It is, however, blue.
#29
Quote by Tangerineseeker
So even economic theories such as Supply and Demand?


That's actually a law, not just a theory.
Quote by Carmel
I can't believe you are whoring yourself out like that.

ಠ_ಠ
#31
Quote by Tangerineseeker
Why is it that even though theories in the natural and human sciences are only right because they have not been disproven are so convincing?
For example t in school science text books often present theories in such a manner that they seem completely true, although they might be wrong and be replaced in 10, 50 or 100 years?
I just wonder why those theories get so much credit (for example big bang theory) although there are many possibilities that they might be wrong.

Quote by Tangerineseeker
Why is it that even though theories in the natural and human sciences are only right because they have not been disproven are so convincing?

Quote by Tangerineseeker
are only right because they have not been disproven are so convincing?

Quote by Tangerineseeker
have not been disproven

Pretty much.
🙈 🙉 🙊
#32
Quote by guitarmaniac88
I don't trust theories, and that's that.


If you don't trust scientific theory, then why not jump off a cliff and see if you can prove the theory of gravity wrong?
Quote by CV334

Sir, the contents of my mouth just blew all over my keyboard, desk, and part of my monitor. For the record, it was slightly chewed Keebler cookies and coffee slurry.

The average pitmonkey's response to my jokes.
#33
Quote by everythingevil3
People like to have something to believe in. its just like faith with religion. regardless of whether its true or not, it gives people answers.

No, it's not, at all. You can pull religious doctrine out of your ass. Scientists have their work exhaustively peer reviewed before it's accepted as credible.
Quote by jakesmellspoo
ooh look at me i'm ERIKLENSHERR and i work at fancy pants desk jobs and wear ties and ply barely legal girls with weed and booze i'm such a classy motherfucker.
#34
I do think though that just because science has been largely right so far we shouldn't blindly trust everything scientists tell us because as people have been saying in this thread there is a massive opportunity for exploitation, not even to mention mistakes in the science itself.
Up The Boro!
#35
Quote by guitarmaniac88
I don't trust theories, and that's that.


Well then you probably can't play anything else than 3 chord punk.. Since everything about scales, modes is also just theories. (If you're a little smart you link the last sentence to real life)..
No gear.. Just tits.. And some gear.. Mostly Fenders.. And tits.. A Takamine acoustic.. An Orange tube amp.. A shitty Fender amp.. AND TITS! And a big fuckload of pedals that i don't know how to use..
#36
Quote by ErikLensherr
The people who come up with those theories are a lot smarter and more devoted to studying scientific matters than I am. It's as simple as that.

If more people thought this way, maybe we'd be able to pass laws to address climate change, instead of every Cletus and Jimbo thinking they can argue against the entire global scientific community because "herp derp it don't feel warmer"


...it's not just a problem of wether Climate Change is true or not. It's a problem of investing in something that will take decennia to give problems and will mostly give problems in areas that we don't care about (AKA Africa). If you'd do a social cost benefit analysis and use a discount rate, you get a large negative amount out of it. That's why we don't do anything about it.
Quote by Carmel
I can't believe you are whoring yourself out like that.

ಠ_ಠ
#37
Quote by Oddsbodkins
I do think though that just because science has been largely right so far we shouldn't blindly trust everything scientists tell us because as people have been saying in this thread there is a massive opportunity for exploitation, not even to mention mistakes in the science itself.

The paranoid fear of "exploitation" is precisely what gets exploited most of the time. See: the conversation, or lack thereof, on climate science in the US.
Quote by Neo Evil11
...it's not just a problem of wether Climate Change is true or not. It's a problem of investing in something that will take decennia to give problems and will mostly give problems in areas that we don't care about (AKA Africa). If you'd do a social cost benefit analysis and use a discount rate, you get a large negative amount out of it. That's why we don't do anything about it.
Could you repeat that in non-econo-jargon English?
Quote by jakesmellspoo
ooh look at me i'm ERIKLENSHERR and i work at fancy pants desk jobs and wear ties and ply barely legal girls with weed and booze i'm such a classy motherfucker.
Last edited by ErikLensherr at Jan 7, 2012,
#38
Quote by ErikLensherr
No, it's not, at all. You can pull religious doctrine out of your ass. Scientists have their work exhaustively peer reviewed before it's accepted as credible.


As do religions... Just look at the vatican. They constantly review religious doctrines and ideals before accepting them as credible to their church. I think that guy was spot on, its exactly like having faith in religion. You can't prove it yourself, so you just have to believe it or not believe it. Just because a scientist tells me he and his team worked for years on developing a theory and have it established it as much as they can still doesn't mean I can prove the theory myself and believe it by personal experimentation. Almost 100% of the things you have learned in your life, you cannot prove yourself. Someone wiht popular credibility or some widely accepted book told you about it, and you accepted it. You can live your life not believing anything you cannot prove, like our friend Descartes in his First Meditations, or you can just ignorantly go along with the majority like the rest of us and be satisfied, questioning things that do not surpass your own personal expectations for truth.
#39
Quote by ErikLensherr
The paranoid fear of "exploitation" is precisely what gets exploited most of the time. See: the conversation, or lack thereof, on climate science in the US.


Well I think there's some middle ground between 'blind trust' and 'paranoid fear'.
Up The Boro!
#40
I think this is a good question. For example there are a lot of scientists that don't think the evolution theory is (entirely) true.
(sorry for my bad english btw)
Page 1 of 3