Fraudulent Tests and the Inability to be Scientific about any Subject.
May 6th 2008 12:33
Fraudulent Tests and the Inability to be Scientific about any Subject.
Okay let’s just be straight about one thing. You have to understand science and reason before you can properly look at any complicated subject in an objective manner. Science is not that hard to understand because it is about how you approach a question. There are plenty people who look at how to approach a problem from a scientific direction and having spent nearly all my working career with scientists, engineers and dealing with science in one form or another I have developed a deep love of science. Why? Because science is the quest for truth and truth in any form should never be feared.
So how does anyone approach a subject from a scientific viewpoint? Does it mean that we should be like rationalist automatons and calculate the answer? Or do they take the lack of evidence as proof of non-existence? Both on surface seem attractive but neither will get you any closer than saying, ‘that if you can’t see it, it can’t exist.’ Terrific approach so long as you are able to explain how everything works from clocks to computers to quantum mechanics. Diodes only exist if you see them? However there is a better approach than trying to do you head in from every random direction.
Observation, Theory and Comparison.
And it works this way:
We make an Observation of an event.
We formulate a Theory for such an event
And compare the theory with data collected in further observation.
If the theory proves false, start again and again and again....
It becomes a deductive cycle until every possibility is reduced.
Now whilst some people use the word science as if they know what it means many seem to forget that it is not an ideology. Without the inductive and deductive reasoning process science ceases to be science but some political pretender using its name in vein. We call this pretender Scientism and it has nothing to do with objective science.
Another problem when approaching a problem is the temptation to grab the conclusion that suits you then find the evidence to support it. This can be accidental when a person does not know any better or it can be intentional when a person is unscrupulously trying to push an agenda. One common way of pushing an agenda is to use a Fraudulent Test.
A Fraudulent Test works by listing all the aspects that a particular opponent or opposing view should have then finding it wanting in each case. The fraud exists because the test was designed to give a negative result from the start and there is no way that the opposing case can be found anything but guilty.
For example:
If I wanted to show that Western Civilization was evil I would create a series of tests for what I deem to be good. Then I would select only the evidence that showed where Western Civilization had failed to match my test. Not only have I stacked the evidence but I have placed myself as the arbiter of what is good and evil. What I am really saying that Western Civilization is evil just because I say so.
We see these kinds of Fraudulent Tests all the time in the print media, controversial books and on blogs sites.
Another example could be constructed over any particular religion. You make the determination of what is correct then design the questions in such a way that the enemy religion or religions have no chance of defence. All you are doing is using your standards to test something that does not agree with your standards. The fact that the enemy religion may have its own set of rules and standards to be used is completely ignored. In fact you would be engaging in little more than a dishonest sleight of hand designed to deceive a reader into thinking that your conclusions were objective and scientific. In reality you were pushing an agenda or a prejudice with fanatical ferocity and as such your conclusion have no scientific validity.
The simplicity of using Fraud to make a case cannot be underestimated because it keeps being used. Sometimes people are fooled by such underhanded tactics because they agree with the overall assertion and therefore have little interest in any opposing view. Sometimes people are deceived in to supporting a proposal that they would not ordinarily support because they were effectively lied to. Despite the fact that such trickery is common, they do standout like a sore thumb.
Often the Fraud Test is designed to help a Straw Man Agrument.
Okay let’s just be straight about one thing. You have to understand science and reason before you can properly look at any complicated subject in an objective manner. Science is not that hard to understand because it is about how you approach a question. There are plenty people who look at how to approach a problem from a scientific direction and having spent nearly all my working career with scientists, engineers and dealing with science in one form or another I have developed a deep love of science. Why? Because science is the quest for truth and truth in any form should never be feared.
So how does anyone approach a subject from a scientific viewpoint? Does it mean that we should be like rationalist automatons and calculate the answer? Or do they take the lack of evidence as proof of non-existence? Both on surface seem attractive but neither will get you any closer than saying, ‘that if you can’t see it, it can’t exist.’ Terrific approach so long as you are able to explain how everything works from clocks to computers to quantum mechanics. Diodes only exist if you see them? However there is a better approach than trying to do you head in from every random direction.
Observation, Theory and Comparison.
And it works this way:
We make an Observation of an event.
We formulate a Theory for such an event
And compare the theory with data collected in further observation.
If the theory proves false, start again and again and again....
It becomes a deductive cycle until every possibility is reduced.
Now whilst some people use the word science as if they know what it means many seem to forget that it is not an ideology. Without the inductive and deductive reasoning process science ceases to be science but some political pretender using its name in vein. We call this pretender Scientism and it has nothing to do with objective science.
Another problem when approaching a problem is the temptation to grab the conclusion that suits you then find the evidence to support it. This can be accidental when a person does not know any better or it can be intentional when a person is unscrupulously trying to push an agenda. One common way of pushing an agenda is to use a Fraudulent Test.
A Fraudulent Test works by listing all the aspects that a particular opponent or opposing view should have then finding it wanting in each case. The fraud exists because the test was designed to give a negative result from the start and there is no way that the opposing case can be found anything but guilty.
For example:
If I wanted to show that Western Civilization was evil I would create a series of tests for what I deem to be good. Then I would select only the evidence that showed where Western Civilization had failed to match my test. Not only have I stacked the evidence but I have placed myself as the arbiter of what is good and evil. What I am really saying that Western Civilization is evil just because I say so.
We see these kinds of Fraudulent Tests all the time in the print media, controversial books and on blogs sites.
Another example could be constructed over any particular religion. You make the determination of what is correct then design the questions in such a way that the enemy religion or religions have no chance of defence. All you are doing is using your standards to test something that does not agree with your standards. The fact that the enemy religion may have its own set of rules and standards to be used is completely ignored. In fact you would be engaging in little more than a dishonest sleight of hand designed to deceive a reader into thinking that your conclusions were objective and scientific. In reality you were pushing an agenda or a prejudice with fanatical ferocity and as such your conclusion have no scientific validity.
The simplicity of using Fraud to make a case cannot be underestimated because it keeps being used. Sometimes people are fooled by such underhanded tactics because they agree with the overall assertion and therefore have little interest in any opposing view. Sometimes people are deceived in to supporting a proposal that they would not ordinarily support because they were effectively lied to. Despite the fact that such trickery is common, they do standout like a sore thumb.
Can you create a test that make fairies seems reasonable
| 68 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by tlcorbin
Coffee Quip
A Global Citizen
Paranormal Paranormal
Is Why
Alaska Chronicle
Sleezer's World
Raven
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
Thanks for your comments.
How would half the 'almighty' blog world survive?
Comment by tlcorbin
Coffee Quip
A Global Citizen
Paranormal Paranormal
Is Why
Alaska Chronicle
Sleezer's World
Raven
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
I could list a few on the front page of Orble right now but I will such people have their little parades. It is a bog and not higher education.
Comment by tlcorbin
Coffee Quip
A Global Citizen
Paranormal Paranormal
Is Why
Alaska Chronicle
Sleezer's World
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
Comment by Clint Emry
Strategy and Solutions
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
Thanks for your comments.
And in some books too.
I make it game to find them sometimes.
Comment by Clint Emry
Strategy and Solutions
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
And television doco's sometimes.