Should we replace democracy with science?spiderwort@lemm.eebanned from sitebanned from site to Asklemmy@lemmy.ml – -61 points – 5 months ago76Post a CommentPreviewYou are viewing a single commentView all commentsShow the parent commentHow about the current system where we vote and do science?Or, maybe we already do 100% science. It's just that the agenda isn't precisely popular. And the voting is just for show.Science is an empirical method of finding fact. Government is a philosophical method of seeking truth. You are being pretty incoherent. How does science determine the order initiatives are addressed?Well first we would change beans into peas. The rest is trivial.99% of the voters wouldn't know science if it bit them on the buttYou make a good case for your own argument.Well somebody's got to.I mean, trying to prove your own theory by being the perfect case study seems a little extreme...Sounds like a wildly unscientific statement, considering e.g ~10% of the US population works in STEM.That doesn't seem to make much of a difference, strangely enough.
How about the current system where we vote and do science?Or, maybe we already do 100% science. It's just that the agenda isn't precisely popular. And the voting is just for show.Science is an empirical method of finding fact. Government is a philosophical method of seeking truth. You are being pretty incoherent. How does science determine the order initiatives are addressed?Well first we would change beans into peas. The rest is trivial.99% of the voters wouldn't know science if it bit them on the buttYou make a good case for your own argument.Well somebody's got to.I mean, trying to prove your own theory by being the perfect case study seems a little extreme...Sounds like a wildly unscientific statement, considering e.g ~10% of the US population works in STEM.That doesn't seem to make much of a difference, strangely enough.
Or, maybe we already do 100% science. It's just that the agenda isn't precisely popular. And the voting is just for show.Science is an empirical method of finding fact. Government is a philosophical method of seeking truth. You are being pretty incoherent. How does science determine the order initiatives are addressed?Well first we would change beans into peas. The rest is trivial.
Science is an empirical method of finding fact. Government is a philosophical method of seeking truth. You are being pretty incoherent. How does science determine the order initiatives are addressed?Well first we would change beans into peas. The rest is trivial.
99% of the voters wouldn't know science if it bit them on the buttYou make a good case for your own argument.Well somebody's got to.I mean, trying to prove your own theory by being the perfect case study seems a little extreme...Sounds like a wildly unscientific statement, considering e.g ~10% of the US population works in STEM.That doesn't seem to make much of a difference, strangely enough.
You make a good case for your own argument.Well somebody's got to.I mean, trying to prove your own theory by being the perfect case study seems a little extreme...
Well somebody's got to.I mean, trying to prove your own theory by being the perfect case study seems a little extreme...
Sounds like a wildly unscientific statement, considering e.g ~10% of the US population works in STEM.That doesn't seem to make much of a difference, strangely enough.
How about the current system where we vote and do science?
Or, maybe we already do 100% science. It's just that the agenda isn't precisely popular. And the voting is just for show.
Science is an empirical method of finding fact.
Government is a philosophical method of seeking truth.
You are being pretty incoherent.
How does science determine the order initiatives are addressed?
Well first we would change beans into peas.
The rest is trivial.
99% of the voters wouldn't know science if it bit them on the butt
You make a good case for your own argument.
Well somebody's got to.
I mean, trying to prove your own theory by being the perfect case study seems a little extreme...
Sounds like a wildly unscientific statement, considering e.g ~10% of the US population works in STEM.
That doesn't seem to make much of a difference, strangely enough.