Isn't science subjective

>>8662623
It is subjective but it works, makes predictions. Are your symbols recursive?

File: 1486504401750.png (969KB, 983x900px) Image search: [Google]

969KB, 983x900px

>>8662623

>>8662623
This is so retarded

>>8662658
Tbh science is actually a very good example of a social construct. There is drfinitely a gap between perceptions of science and science in reality.

>>8662623
Bump

>>8662623
The good thing about science is that it's independent of syntax.

If you measure the force of gravity on two different masses, you can develop your terminology and analysis however you want but it better give the same result as another system.

>>8662623
>We need to decolonise science and start from an African perspective.

>>8662623
Schrodenger's cat shows people have subjectivity.

File: 800px-Wernher_von_Braun_1960.jpg (153KB, 800x1020px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 800x1020px

>>8662623
>a different view of science

there is no such thing as a different view in empiricism.

>>8662998
Our eyes are different. My perception is (slightly) different than yours. I might see blue light more intensely or whatever.
What makes you think it's not the same with science?

>>8662979
>Newton is a cis white male

>>8662623
>Isn't science subjective
>africa has different symbols

Blaming the lack of outstanding scientists from an entire fucking continent on notational issues.

Fuck off, brainlet

>>8662623
>>>/pol/

>>8662623
Africa didn't really go much into science/maths in the days when other civilisations were beginning to explore them.

>>8662623
Genuises praise ideas
Brainlets praise people

>>8663204
>because if 1,000,000 people from around the world are given the same problem there's still only one right answer

>>8662623
Is a rose by any other name not still a rose?

Yes, it's completely subjective built on arbitrary rules.

2+2 = 4 is made up and arbitrary. You could just as easily define 4 as 8 / 2.

All data is open to interpretation.

>>8662623
Symbols are arbitrary. You're messing things up.

>>8662677
I'll never understand how the people that bash science use tools derived from it (not like you can escape this in the 21st century) but fail to see the irony in their ways

>>8662658
Science literally is a social construct though
That obviously doesn't make it "less valid" or "culturally biased."
Postmodern attacks on science are designed around this motte and bailey. They implicitly assume that "made by humans," which it is, implies some immutable fallibility, which it does not, opening the door to radical subjectivism.

>>8663547
Well, the "arbitrary" rules are chosen to optimize predictive capability, which we can discern through direct observations, so they're nowhere near as arbitrary as you think. Like >>8662950 says, the choice of syntax is irrelevant, as long as the system -performs- as desired, i.e. if you define the real numbers axiomatically, all systems you construct, using whatever notation, that satisfy the axioms are equally valid for that purpose. The point being they're not actually "different," in any other-than-superficial way.

>>8662677
Greek philosophers called this status "removed from reality" -that you can only see your perception of what's there, not the essence of what it actually is.

But they weren't retarded enough to call it a social construct.

>>8663772
Perhaps pop music is a good example. It's so samey because of a sort of convergent evolution. The different artists are exploiting the same market niche and responding to the same market forces so that despite their differences they come to produce nearly identical content. All the while pop music is "socially constructed" but this construction can be resolved into its more fundamental forces/components, and everything primarily and extensively influenced/directed by these fundamental aspects can be said to be, or become, pop music.
These aspects are no less real or concrete for postmodernists' insistence on neglecting them under an impenetrable veil of mysticism.

>>8663263
Fuck off don't even make jokes about Newton like that. I really love him and he would not appreciate you saying that.