Science - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Pollution, global warming, urbanisation etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By late
#15081309
Science tells people a lot of things they don't want to hear.

Shooting the messenger is a thoroughly human response. One that is encouraged by those that stand to benefit, you know, oil companies and such. Now that social media has gotten weaponised, they are quite good at it.

No human institution is without problems. The corruption that is rotting the country is pretty much everywhere.

Bitching is also human nature. A decade ago, in the last economic crisis, people were ragging on economists constantly. Macroeconomist and historian Brad DeLong had a point, "When did anyone ever listen to macroeconomists?" It's true, I bring up Stiglitz all the time, but it's a waste of time.

Back in the 90s, we were warned that we weren't ready for a pandemic on the scale of the 1918 flu (or worse). While some modest reforms were developed, the basics, like surge capacity (like ventilators) didn't happen. Sure, we got the emergency stockpile, but that's close to empty now. Even worse, the contract to maintain those ventilators expired, and the Trump crowd didn't bother to make a new contract. So much winning, eh?

This points to a larger problem. If you ever see a thread titled 'Enlightenment on trial', that will be where I discuss it. There is war on reason.

One 'tell' is when reforms do not get discussed. Tighter regulation of drug companies, regs requiring much greater levels of transparency, these are not new proposals.

But as the rich have gotten more powerful, the influence of science and ethical concerns has declined proportionally. Which is something Stiglitz has talked about extensively.

The only candidate that got serious about that was Warren. Which will tell you how far we are from the sorts of reforms that would reverse some of the decay we've seen since 1980. (Some was there before then, but that was when the crazy really took hold)

Curiouser and curiouser.
By Truth To Power
#15081384
late wrote:Science tells people a lot of things they don't want to hear.

True. Like some people don't want to hear the fact that there is no climate crisis, no climate emergency, and never will be one caused by human use of fossil fuels, so they change the data to match their theory.
A decade ago, in the last economic crisis, people were ragging on economists constantly.

And quite rightly.
Macroeconomist and historian Brad DeLong had a point, "When did anyone ever listen to macroeconomists?" It's true, I bring up Stiglitz all the time, but it's a waste of time.

Well, the XSSR listened to Jeffrey Sachs and the other Harvard boys, privatized everything against the advice of dozens of eminent western economists (including four, count 'em, FOUR Nobel laureates) who advocated a geoist approach https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Open_letter_to_Mikhail_Gorbachev_(1990) like China's, and thus wrecked the economies of Russia and the other XSSR states and turned them into the current fascist kleptocracies.
This points to a larger problem. If you ever see a thread titled 'Enlightenment on trial', that will be where I discuss it. There is war on reason.

Yes, and anti-fossil-fuel hysteria is part of it.
One 'tell' is when reforms do not get discussed.

Right. No one is allowed to mention the fact that the current financial crisis, like the GFC, the Great Depression, etc. has been caused primarily by the debt money system of bankster privilege.
But as the rich have gotten more powerful, the influence of science and ethical concerns has declined proportionally. Which is something Stiglitz has talked about extensively.

It goes back to Kant, then through Hegel and Marx to the modern Left. Kant said, "I have had to demolish reason in order to make room for faith." In economics, the neoclassicals on the right took Marx's conflation of land with capital (producer goods) as "the means of production" one better, and turned everything into "capital": physical capital, natural capital, human capital, financial capital, blah, blah, blah. All to obscure the non-contributory character of the landowner's participation in the economy.
The only candidate that got serious about that was Warren. Which will tell you how far we are from the sorts of reforms that would reverse some of the decay we've seen since 1980. (Some was there before then, but that was when the crazy really took hold).

The DNC prefers Trump to Bernie or Warren, that's obvious. The way forward from here is not so obvious, but one thing is certain: it will have to be based on genuine empirical science, in particular a genuine empirical science of economics, which does not yet exist.
By late
#15081396
Truth To Power wrote:
It goes back to Kant...



If you want to understand Kant (I make the little joke) you need to read his Prologmena to Any Future Metaphysics.

In it he talks about trying to make a science out of metaphysics (philosophy, basically). Point is, his philosophy was cutting edge, in the 1800s. After that came generations of philosophic thought. Depends on how you look at things, and I freely admit the way I do it is a bit different than most.

Same thing with Marx, the world has moved on, even if you have not.
User avatar
By Varannal
#15093743
late wrote:If you want to understand Kant (I make the little joke) you need to read his Prologmena to Any Future Metaphysics.

In it he talks about trying to make a science out of metaphysics (philosophy, basically). Point is, his philosophy was cutting edge, in the 1800s. After that came generations of philosophic thought. Depends on how you look at things, and I freely admit the way I do it is a bit different than most.

Same thing with Marx, the world has moved on, even if you have not.


Thanks for the advice. With over 500 programming languages existing, it is no wonder that programmers get stuck being unable to proceed with coding tasks even with deadline approaching. Starting from Fortran that not many may recall today to dynamic programming like Python, it still follows the same principles of patience, accuracy, following commands to a letter. I would like to advise you to pay attention to a resource https://au.edubirdie.com/programming-assignment-help that will help you understand the question of how to complete tasks related to programming. Seeking for programming assignment help online, students often receive more confusing help that leads to incorrect results. After turning to EduBirdie Australia writing experts, any script will be remedied with detailed explanation regarding most efficient solutions.

The murder of George Floyd was not a tragedy. It […]

Sorry. Aside from yes, no and conditional, what […]

June 1, Sunday It has been an unnerving night f[…]

It's impossible to get a job

I think a lot of employers might be impressed by t[…]