There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.
If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.
| Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.|
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with !
RationalWiki talk:Constructive dialogue
A matter of faith
Original Message -----
From: Dr Sandy Kramer To: Sandy Kramer Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 2:25 PM Subject: "The Supernatural, The Supranatural, and The Natural World as Reflected by the Scientific Method"
"The chief characteristic which distinguishes the scientific method from other methods of acquiring knowledge is that scientists seek to let reality speak for itself, supporting a theory when a theory's predictions are confirmed and challenging a theory when its predictions prove false. Although procedures vary from one field of inquiry to another, identifiable features distinguish scientific inquiry from other methods of obtaining knowledge. Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter. Theories that encompass wider domains of inquiry may bind many independently derived hypotheses together in a coherent, supportive structure. Theories, in turn, may help form new hypotheses or place groups of hypotheses into context." (WIKIPEDIA: "Scientific Method")
Whatever else the supernatural (creationism), the supranatural (intelligent design), and the natural (materialism) may be, they are not under the aegis of science. They are metaphysical constructs. No amount of arcane philosophical jargon and restrictive obscurant definitional legerdemain can alter this conclusion.
Without judgmentalism, it may be said that attempts to classify philosophical models as "science" will serve no purpose other than providing comfort to their adherents. Ultimately, we are dealing with matters of faith, not determinants of knowledge. Gentlemen, choose your weapons.
As opposed to any kind of new "civility policy," I move to roll RW: Constructive Dialogue into Community Standards, so that perhaps a few more people can see this. RoninMacbeth (talk) 18:05, 6 November 2018 (UTC)