• testfactor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    If you aren’t saying that “science isn’t science without collaboration,” can you give an example of something that is science without collaboration? I only ask because you state that’s not what you’re saying, but follow it up with what, to my attempt at reading comprehension, is you just restating the thing you said you aren’t saying.

    And I would argue science done in secret can have enormous impacts beyond “simply profits.” The Manhattan Project for example. I think it would be absurd to say what was going on there was anything but science, but there was no collaboration with the greater scientific community or intent to share their findings.

    And look, of course you can be a researcher without being a scientist. Historians are researchers but not scientists obviously. But when what you are researching is physics and natural sciences, you are a scientist. That’s what the word literally means. When your definition requires you to eliminate Sir Isaac Newton, maybe it’s your definition that’s wrong.

    You say you see no problem with calling an apple a fruit when broadly speaking. Neither do I. But that doesn’t mean that I wouldn’t be absolutely delusional to insist that an apple wasn’t actually an apple.

    • Lemminary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m so sorry but you’re getting unnecessarily aggressive over this. I don’t wish to participate or waste my time with someone who will willfully ignore or misinterpret what I’m saying. All your answers are above if you care to see things from my point of view. Thanks for the chat.

      • testfactor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I reread my post and I’m not sure what you took as aggressive? That I used the word delusional? I didn’t intend that to be harsh, but sorry if it came across that way.

        But, in my experience, arguments over how words are defined are usually unproductive because language is inherently arbitrary, so I’m fine calling it here. I doubt we’d make any progress.

        I hope life is treating you well and you have a pleasant evening.

        • urbeker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Your argument seemed perfectly reasonable. I think it was just a classic case of the discomfort of someone pointing out cognitive dissonance being misinterpreted as aggression.

          I do wonder if this is a case of the in-group has repurposed a word to make it more useful to them. Perhaps inside modern academia science means published in a scientific journal. Even though outside that group to use the word like that would seem wrong.