- 3/10/14 08:05 pm
-
sliktsrationalism (in the narrow, scientifically skeptical sense) isn't about simply putting down unorthodox views; the rational worldview is at odds with mainstream opinion on a large number of topics, like life, climate sciences, energetics, public policy etc. rationalism also doesn't just blindly side with those who adopt the trappings of science; for instance, the legitimacy of social sciences like economics (or lack thereof) is part of the normal discourse for rationalists, including RationalWiki. if you want to talk about scientific consensus, the field of economics is not a great choice, but much less is journalism or "educated comments". even if you were talking about consensus in the scientific literature, showing that it changes just means that science works, since it isn't about having a fixed body of knowledge, but about the process of generating reliable theories. I appreciate your answer since it seems sincere, but it really just goes to show my point that incompetence breeds itself. you even bring up your background, as if there weren't so many examples of people with scientific distinctions being utterly wrong. people like you know just enough to be skeptical, but not enough for it to lead to anything but muddle-brained relativism
also, a friendly tip: not everyone is looking for comments on their language, it comes off as patronizing if you just assume they do