this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2025
166 points (75.9% liked)

Science Memes

15015 readers
2418 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sidhean@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

google ~~"en passant~~ methodological naturalism"

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh yes. You absolutely don't have to believe that the earth is billions of years old to understand geology. You just have to assume that it looks like it is, while doing geology. That's completely compatible with believing that it really is just 8,000 years old.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

If that's a steelman then it's definitely at forging temperature (which jet fuel btw can achieve easily), collapsing under its own weight.

Try this: Is it consistent to believe that evolution is the means by which God created, and continues to create, creatures? Does "well evolution just happens" have more, less, or equally much of an argument for itself? Note: Blindly assuming naturalism instead of God's will doesn't count because neither of those are falsifiable.

Thing is: There's more than one way to connect the data points into an overall theory. Those theories try to explain the data points by starting from made-up axioms, and naturalism is just as much made-up as the Spaghetti monster. Unless you want to posit some kind of Platonism?

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

If that’s a steelman then it’s definitely at forging temperature (which jet fuel btw can achieve easily), collapsing under its own weight.

I don't understand. I simply agreed with the previous poster. Do you disagree with anything I wrote?

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

So that wasn't sarcasm? Interesting. Possible instance of backwards causation, the physicists will be ecstatic.

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

So that wasn’t sarcasm?

Not quite sarcasm, not quite reductio ad absurdum. It's just a reminder of certain psychological realities.

Possible instance of backwards causation

Don't see how you get that.