1220
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] teichflamme@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago

It's still better than relying on literally anything else. Doesn't have to be perfect.

[-] AndyLikesCandy@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's the thing though, outside of studies published in journals where you look up their ranking and it's high enough that you trust the peer review, how do you tell the difference between imperfect and flawed in a way that renders the conclusion useless to your use case? It's not a rhetorical question, that's what I'm saying requires deeper knowledge and where you should not trust it alone without having qualified help review it for you. And without the help, yeah it's just as well to go without.

[-] teichflamme@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

If the study has major flaws it's relatively easy to spot if you have an idea what to look for. You don't need special education for that.

It's not even a problem if you consider reputable sources in the first place, which, again, is relatively easy to do.

Looking at the alternative, even a flawed study is better than a simple opinion piece.

So yeah, I disagree with everything you said basically.

[-] AndyLikesCandy@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You disagree with my statement that is not actually contradicted by anything in your statement, apart from your open acceptance of flawed studies?

My question then is this: what do they teach kids to allow them to spot flaws and what do they teach them as the method for determining who is reputable? Beyes theorem? How to control for multiple variables? I don't actually know whether they go into this or tell kids to JUST trust an authority.

Flawed studies have done all kinds of harm over the years before being retracted. Linking vaccines to autism for one.

[-] teichflamme@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

You disagree with my statement that is not actually contradicted by anything in your statement, apart from your open acceptance of flawed studies?

Because your statement offers no viable alternative and basically condemns following scientific literature unless you are a trained professional on the grounds that some studies might be flawed.

Which is what I tried to point out in both of my prior comments to no avail.

My question then is this: what do they teach kids to allow them to spot flaws and what do they teach them as the method for determining who is reputable? Beyes theorem? How to control for multiple variables? I don't actually know whether they go into this or tell kids to JUST trust an authority.

That question is impossible to answer. Even if we were only talking about the US, but much less globally. What we can agree on is that it's probably not enough in most places.

Flawed studies have done all kinds of harm over the years before being retracted. Linking vaccines to autism for one.

And the attitude of "one study has been flawed so I won't trust science ever again" is something that you predict to be a better viable alternative?

this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2023
1220 points (98.4% liked)

News

23367 readers
3108 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS