Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Greenfield: Science is for Stupid People
Sultan Knish blog ^ | Tuesday, September 30, 2014 | Daniel Greenfield

Posted on 09/30/2014 5:44:30 AM PDT by Louis Foxwell

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Science is for Stupid People

Posted by Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog

Every ideology needs to believe in its inevitability. Religions get their inevitability from prophecies; secular ideologies get theirs from the modernist fallacy.

The modernist fallacy says that history is moving on an inevitable track toward their ideology. Resistance is futile, you will be liberalized. Marxism predicted the inevitable breakdown of capitalism. Obama keeps talking about being “on the right side of history” as if history, like a university history curriculum, has a right side and a wrong side. All everyone has to do is grab a sign and march “Forward!” to the future.

The bad economics and sociology around which the left builds its Socialist sand castles assume that technological progress will mean improved control. Capitalism with its mass production convinced budding Socialists that the entire world could be run like a giant factory under technocrats who would use industrial techniques to control the economic production of mankind in line with their ideals.

The USSR and moribund European economies broke that theory into a million little pieces.

The dot com revolution with its databases and subtle tools for manipulating individuals on a collective basis led to a Facebook Socialism that crowdsources its culture wars and “nudges” everyone into better habits, lower body masses and conveniently available death panels.

The iSocialist, like his industrial predecessor, assumes that technology gives superintelligent leftists better tools for controlling everything. The planned economy failed in the twentieth because the tools of propaganda posters, quotas and gulags were too crude. This time he is certain that it will work.

Intelligence is to leftists what divine right was to the crowned kings of Europe. They frantically brand themselves as smart because in a technocracy, superiority comes from intelligence. Their vision is the right one because they are the smart ones. Their shiny future is backed by what they call “science”.

Science, the magic of the secular age, is their church. But science isn’t anyone’s church. Science is much better at disproving things than at proving them. It’s a useful tool for skeptics, but a dangerous tool for rulers. Like art, science is inherently subversive and like art, when it’s restricted and controlled, it stops being interesting.

Neil deGrasse Tyson’s defenders reacted to his basic errors by asserting that even if he had made a mistake, science, collectively, was right. Science is of course neither right nor wrong; its methodology can be used to determine whether something is right or wrong.

In Tyson’s case, science determined long ago that at least one of his claims was wrong. Neil deGrasse Tyson doesn’t embody science. No individual does. What Tyson embodies is manufactured intelligence. Manufactured intelligence is how we knew that Obama was smart. But manufactured intelligence has the same relationship to intelligence as a painting of the ocean does to the real thing.

The real ocean is complicated and messy. So is real intelligence. Manufactured intelligence is the fashion model playing a genius in a movie. Real intelligence is an awkward man obsessing over a handful of ideas, some of them ridiculously wrong, but one of which will change the world.

Real intelligence isn’t marketable because it doesn’t make an elite feel good about its power.

Biblical fake prophets were often preferred to real prophets because they made rulers feel comfortable about the future. The modern technoprophet assures a secular elite that it can effectively control people and that it even has the obligation to do so. It tells them that “science” is on their side.

The easy way to tell real religion from fake religion is that real religion doesn’t make you feel good. It doesn’t assure you that everything you’re doing is right and that you ought to keep on doing it.

The same holds true for science. Real science doesn’t make you feel smart. Fake science does.

No matter how smart you think you are, real science will make you feel stupid far more often than it will make you feel smart. Real science not only tells us how much more we don’t know than we know, a state of affairs that will continue for all of human history, but it tells us how fragile the knowledge that we have gained is, how prone we are to making childish mistakes and allowing our biases to think for us.

Science is a rigorous way of making fewer mistakes. It’s not very useful to people who already know everything. Science is for stupid people who know how much they don’t know.

A look back at the march of science doesn’t show an even line of progress led by smooth-talking popularizers who are never wrong. Instead the cabinets of science are full of oddballs, unqualified, jealous, obsessed and eccentric, whose pivotal discoveries sometimes came about by accident. Science, like so much of human accomplishment, often depended on lucky accidents to provide a result that could then be isolated and systematized into a useful understanding of the process.

Modernism is a style that offers a seamless vision of perfection that doesn’t exist. The accomplishments of our age haven’t changed human nature and they have not made us infallible.

Real science tells us that we are basically stupid. A close study of history proves it. And that’s a good thing. Stupid people can learn from their mistakes. Self-assured elites convinced of their own superior intelligence can’t. Everyone makes mistakes. The future belongs to those who recognize them.

The inability of Neil deGrasse Tyson and his defenders to acknowledge that he is wrong is a revealing look at the rotten core of the liberal elite which is incapable of admitting its errors, but sneers and smears its way out of a moral reckoning every time. Its ideology with its assumption of central control over lives and economies is too dependent on its own illusion of genius not to lie about its failures.

It is too big to fail and that makes its failure inevitable.

Tysonism is why ObamaCare suffered a disastrous launch, why the VA reorganization didn’t work and why we’re back in Iraq. Technocrats don’t make mistakes. They can’t. They’re only at the top because they’re smart. If they ever admitted to being stupid, they would lose their right to rule.

Like Lysenkoism, Tysonism uses ideology to determine the outcomes of science. That’s how we keep ending up with Global Warming as settled science no matter how often the actual science contradicts it.

Tysonism appropriates science without understanding it. Its science consists of factoids, some right and some wrong, which simplify and clarify everything. Its manufactured intelligence makes people feel smart without actually giving them the critical tools to question the false assumptions of a Tyson.

What the left calls science is really a hypothesis accepted as a fact without the skepticism. Its intelligence is a conclusion without bothering to determine whether it’s true. Science and intelligence are perpetual processes that are never truly settled. But in law and government, as in all other fields, the left discards the process and asserts an inevitable outcome by virtue of its superiority.

Intelligence as ideology is at the heart of the left. Its Orwellian twist discards the need for using intelligence to question its ideology by asserting that the issue is settled. To be smart is to be left and to be left is to be smart. And only stupid people would question that.

There is no need to think about anything because the smart people have already done all the thinking. You can show you are smart by accepting their conclusions or show your stupidity by questioning them.

Science and skepticism are the tools of stupid people. As Socrates put it, I know that I know nothing. We have the most to fear from the smart people who don’t know and will never admit how little they know.


TOPICS: Government; History; Politics; Religion
KEYWORDS: danielgreenfield; greenfield; sultanknish
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last
To: arderkrag

Science is a rigorous way of making fewer mistakes. It’s not very useful to people who already know everything. Science is for stupid people who know how much they don’t know.


The point of the article in one line ^^


21 posted on 09/30/2014 7:15:36 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

I found it amusing that Marx had a reflexive defense for his ideas calling his opponents “unscientific”.
(Ref: “Intellectuals: From Marx and Tolstoy to Sartre and Chomsky”, Paul Johnson)

It’s funny that the left and the anti-theists do exactly the same thing today.


22 posted on 09/30/2014 7:17:54 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

Great column.

Was there something specific in all of Tyson’s output that is reflected in Greenfield’s statement “Neil deGrasse Tyson’s defenders reacted to his basic errors by asserting that even if he had made a mistake, science, collectively, was right.” or is it just Tyson in general?

I don’t follow Tyson other than generally knowing that he seems to be a higher class of the Bill Nye sort.


23 posted on 09/30/2014 7:46:20 AM PDT by NewHampshireDuo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
Science, the magic of the secular age, is their church. But science isn’t anyone’s church. Science is much better at disproving things than at proving them. It’s a useful tool for skeptics, but a dangerous tool for rulers.

Greenfield boils down the complex to it's understandable essence... Amazing. Thanks for the ping.

24 posted on 09/30/2014 7:53:14 AM PDT by GOPJ ("The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants" - Albert Camus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NewHampshireDuo

This must be it:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3209404/posts


25 posted on 09/30/2014 7:54:17 AM PDT by NewHampshireDuo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
Inflammatory and misleading title and rhetoric. The use of the word "stupid" is what is meant to grab the reader, and the author mis-uses the word repeatedly.

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the principle meanings of the word "stupid" are:

(1) not intelligent : having or showing a lack of ability to learn and understand things
(2) not sensible or logical
(3) not able to think normally because you are drunk, tired, etc.

So, if a group of people are fundamentally incapable of learning or understanding things, science is not going to be of much help to them. Clearly, science is NOT for "stupid" people.

Now, of course, I get the author's intent, which is to say, "Science is for people who wish to understand things that they currently do not know, Science is NOT for people who believe that they already know everything with certainty."

Of course, it is not as attention grabbing to write:

"Science is for uninformed people seeking knowledge"

I just have a pet peeve about distorting the meaning of words.
26 posted on 09/30/2014 8:14:17 AM PDT by Rebel_Ace (Tags?!? Tags?!? We don' neeeed no stinkin' Tags!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NewHampshireDuo

Thanks for the link. That provided the context I was missing.


27 posted on 09/30/2014 8:17:44 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: dead

I don’t if this is what Greenfield is referring to about Tyson not admitting he made a mistake, but it does certainly illustrate the point very well.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3209404/posts#12


28 posted on 09/30/2014 8:22:45 AM PDT by Sioux-san
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

To us, “science” is a set of procedures that help us to learn about reality. To the left, “science” is a set of dogmatic beliefs that are inarguable as long as they serve the Revolution, but not a moment longer.


29 posted on 09/30/2014 8:28:07 AM PDT by Tax-chick (I can play the piano just as well with or without shoes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
The inability of Neil deGrasse Tyson and his defenders to acknowledge that he is wrong is a revealing look at the rotten core of the liberal elite which is incapable of admitting its errors, but sneers and smears its way out of a moral reckoning every time. Its ideology with its assumption of central control over lives and economies is too dependent on its own illusion of genius not to lie about its failures.... Tysonism uses ideology to determine the outcomes of science. That’s how we keep ending up with Global Warming as settled science no matter how often the actual science contradicts it.... Tysonism appropriates science without understanding it.


30 posted on 09/30/2014 8:34:19 AM PDT by Albion Wilde (S.I.N. = Systematic Inversion of Norms)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

Great column. Boy I’m really getting slow on the uptake these days. I didn’t see as satire until almost the end of the article. Getting old sucks...


31 posted on 09/30/2014 9:34:54 AM PDT by jmacusa (Liberalism defined: When mom and dad go away for the weekend and the kids are in charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

Outstanding work. Thanks for posting it.


32 posted on 09/30/2014 9:51:39 AM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
From Michael Crichton's "Aliens Cause Global Warming" speech:
Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.

And, for good measure, Rudyard Kipling from "Gods Of The Copybook Headings:

...

As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!


33 posted on 09/30/2014 11:01:56 AM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell; All
Neil deGrasse Tyson Errors Whitewashed

http://www.volnation.com/forum/politics/224890-neil-degrasse-tyson-errors-whitewashed.html

34 posted on 09/30/2014 2:45:27 PM PDT by marktwain (The old media must die for the Republic to live. Long live the new media!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

I came away with the impression that these are remarkably stupid people with no effective understanding of the world.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You got it.The USA should shut the UN down and expel it from NYC. Its just a den for barbarians.


35 posted on 10/01/2014 8:25:45 PM PDT by Candor7 (Obama fascism article:(http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

1938- propellers are science and anyone advocating for jets are anti-science!


36 posted on 10/01/2014 8:30:11 PM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

There is one settled science I know of: A baby in the womb is 100% human.


37 posted on 10/01/2014 8:32:41 PM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

Parliament of Bores


38 posted on 10/01/2014 8:33:17 PM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Rebel_Ace

*face palm*

His point is....

From the leftist viewpoint and attitude, they are the intelligent ones and everyone else is stupid. They have to be stupid to think they are so intelligent that they cannot be wrong. Only a stupid person thinks that way.

True Intelligent people know their limits and know there is a lot they do not know. But these are the people that the self-annointed elites think are stupid.


39 posted on 10/01/2014 8:38:02 PM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson