“Science Versus Scientism”

Image: http://www.thequotes.in

Also see:

Will You Eat Cultured Meat Grown From Human Cells?:

Fake Meat Is a Catastrophe for Your Metabolic Health

Excess omega-6 fat in the form of linoleic acid (LA) is one of the most significant contributors to metabolic dysfunction. It is literally a metabolic poison that, in my opinion, is the primary contributor to the epidemic in chronic disease we have seen in the past 150 years. I am so passionate about this topic, I’m currently writing a new book with Chris Knobbe about this that will be out next year.

Our LA consumption 150 years ago was between 2 and 3 grams per day. Today it is 10 to 20 times higher. This leads to severe mitochondrial dysfunction, insulin resistance, decreased NAD+ levels, obesity and a radical decrease in your ability to generate cellular energy.

It is obvious that fake meat requires basic substrates or building blocks to create the actual food. The genetic engineering is primarily done to reproduce the flavor and texture composition of real meat. What this process fails to do on steroids is reproduce the healthy fatty acid composition of real meat…

DB Note: This article is a blaring example of what the following article is all about!

****

“Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.”
― Thomas Paine (Hat-Tip to Dispatches From The Asylum)

“The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth.”
― H.L. Mencken

****

Image: http://www.crowrising.com

****

Quote from the following article:

…what is scientism?

Scientism is a dogmatic ideology which presumes that “science,” in the narrower sense of the word, has the answers to all questions. For believers in scientism the claims of metaphysics are invalid and have no bearing on reality. The physical cosmos is all there is. There is nothing but three dimensions (or four if we include time as a dimension) which are perceived with our five senses. This is all there is and this is therefore all that is worth studying.

The problem with scientism, or one of its many problems, is that it tends to be prejudiced and therefore not very scientific. Take, for instance, the scientistic view of our ancient ancestors. There is a presumption that the so-called cave man was brutish or even bestial. G. K. Chesterton, in The Everlasting Man, alludes to the so-called scientific view of the club-wielding cave man whose primary occupation was beating his wife over the head and dragging her around by the hair. Yet such “science” was not very scientific because it was based on a prejudiced presumption about the nature of “primitive” man and not on any actual evidence…

I have been shouting this since I graduated from college, some forty years ago. Science, thanks to the Anglo-Zionist corporate-capitalist system, has been downgraded to the level of mere religion: “He doesn’t BELIEVE in evolution!” “He doesn’t BELIEVE in global warming/climate change!” “He doesn’t BELIEVE in COVID-19!” etc, etc, ad-nauseum! Everything this inbred-vermin owned, corporate-capitalist system touches turns to shit: science, philosophy, the arts, commercial art, culture and life itself!

“Belief and believe” have nothing, whatsoever, to do with legitimate scientific inquiry: “The Scientific Method”. The legitimate scientist today, is not only shunned and silenced by the corporate-owned quacks around him, the legitimate scientist is also shunned and silenced by the corporate-owned universities, media talking-heads and government-stooges:

“… as the powerful become more successful, richer, and further intoxicated with power, the inconvenient truths of science are suppressed. When good science is suppressed, people die.” BMJ (source)

Today, the vast multitude of criminal frauds and liars, like Fauci, Gates, Birx, Biden and Trump, are those who are admired, listened to and obeyed, while the legitimate, fact/truth seekers are ignored, and condemned as “covidiots” or “anti-vaxxers” or “climate-denialists”. The infantile, pseudo-left morons are now in charge of this worldwide political/economic system, and the rest of us are going to pay the highest price possible, if we do nothing, soon, to stop them:

Science Versus Scientism

By Joseph Pearce
Intellectual Takeout

Science is good but scientism isn’t. Science looks at the cosmos objectively, indeed scientifically. Scientism doesn’t.

Science, in the broadest sense of the word, derived from the Latin scientia, simply means “knowledge.” In this sense, all branches of knowledge can be considered as science. Philosophy is a science, history is a science, theology is a science, et cetera. In the more narrow sense, which is the way the modern world uses the word, science is limited to knowledge of the physical cosmos, as observed empirically and objectively. This form of science would have been what Aristotle called physics, to distinguish it from the other forms of scientia, i.e. metaphysics and mathematics, or what the mediaevals would have called natural philosophy, i.e. the love of wisdom to be learned from nature.

Science is good, whether we understand it in the older, broader sense of the word or the newer, narrower sense. Scientism, on the other hand, is not good, not least because it is not science.

So what is scientism?

Scientism is a dogmatic ideology which presumes that “science,” in the narrower sense of the word, has the answers to all questions. For believers in scientism the claims of metaphysics are invalid and have no bearing on reality. The physical cosmos is all there is. There is nothing but three dimensions (or four if we include time as a dimension) which are perceived with our five senses. This is all there is and this is therefore all that is worth studying.

The problem with scientism, or one of its many problems, is that it tends to be prejudiced and therefore not very scientific. Take, for instance, the scientistic view of our ancient ancestors. There is a presumption that the so-called cave man was brutish or even bestial. G. K. Chesterton, in The Everlasting Man, alludes to the so-called scientific view of the club-wielding cave man whose primary occupation was beating his wife over the head and dragging her around by the hair. Yet such “science” was not very scientific because it was based on a prejudiced presumption about the nature of “primitive” man and not on any actual evidence. Chesterton bemoaned that “people have been interested in everything about the cave-man except what he did in the cave.” The evidence was “little enough”, Chesterton conceded, “but it is concerned with the real cave-man and his cave and not the literary cave-man and his club.” Insisting that we remain truly scientific, Chesterton reminds us that “it will be valuable to our sense of reality to consider quite simply what the real evidence is, and not go beyond it.”

Read the Whole Article

Copyright © Intellectual Takeout

Source: Science Versus Scientism – LewRockwell