Science!! Fucking magnets, how do they work?

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Denaut

Denaut

Trump's Staff
2,739
1,279
Mist_sl said:
All you did was pick out 6 arbitrary names, one of which is a psychologist.

Sociology is bullshit to begin with, but sociology is just one of the social sciences. The best sociology is typically done by economists, but that's also another social science.
Click to expand...
You are right, I should have added Piketty to the list. My point was that the best social science comes from non-social scientists, but people with other types of training. The people in my list have all done original research as well as more meta-research (such as the published books).
 
iannis

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
I wonder a little what the question was exactly. The doctors I know do keep abreast on the relevant journals. And there's quite a bit from a practical standpoint that might keep any of them from reporting using "current research". And what exactly would scientific methods be defined as in the daily practice of medicine? I'm not being obtuse, I'm not trying to be a dipshit. What would that be defined as?

I'm not saying that they study the shit like they're back in med school. Who has time for that? But you don't have to. That's kinda why med school exists. That's kinda why medical libraries exist.

I do think it's fair to call the practitioner of a scientific discipline a scientist. Perfectly fair.

If that's all you meant, that they're not all sitting around the labratory looking at mice and solving equations... well, no shit. They're doctors. I do not disagree. But if you go back and read that position, you're basically accusing them of trial and error voodoo magic on a daily basis and that goes beyond a mischaracterization.

Yeah, even for doctors there are good ones and bad ones. Smart ones and dumb ones. There's even some lazy ones.
 
Mist

Mist

REEEEeyore
<Gold Donor>
31,197
23,357
Denaut_sl said:
You are right, I should have added Piketty to the list. My point was that the best social science comes from non-social scientists, but people with other types of training. The people in my list have all done original research as well as more meta-research (such as the published books).
Click to expand...
Social scientist and sociology are not interchangeable words. An economist is a social scientist.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Denaut_sl said:
My point was that the best social science comes from non-social scientists, but people with other types of training.
Click to expand...
The broader your perspective, the more experience you have, and the more grounded in quantifiability and replicability your research methodology is, the better you do as a scientist.

That shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.
 
ZyyzYzzy

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
Mist_sl said:
Frequently the drug company that made said remedy has no idea WHY the remedy works on a chemical level, they generally stumble upon them accidentally while trying to make something else. So they frequently don't even have the most basic causality down. What kind of science is that?
Click to expand...
stop lying you sack of shit.
 
Mist

Mist

REEEEeyore
<Gold Donor>
31,197
23,357
Well, that part is definitely true of many neuropsych meds. We still have no very good theory of why lithium works as a mood stabilizer.

(Relevant because SJWs are bipolar nutjobs.)
 
ZyyzYzzy

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
Mist_sl said:
Well, that part is definitely true of many neuropsych meds. We still have no very good theory of why lithium works as a mood stabilizer.

(Relevant because SJWs are bipolar nutjobs.)
Click to expand...
Ummm are you fucking serious? We know exactly how and why most neurological drugs work.
 
Phazael

Phazael

Confirmed Beta Shitlord, Fat Bastard
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
14,659
31,514
Give it up. Cuntasaurus will just stubbornly argue this bullshit endlessly. Soft science peddlers have to lie to themselves constantly to justify their poor career choices.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
25,426
49,042
Mist_sl said:
Well, that part is definitely true of many neuropsych meds. We still have no very good theory of why lithium works as a mood stabilizer.

(Relevant because SJWs are bipolar nutjobs.)
Click to expand...
Points out psychiatrists don't know why a certain subclass of drugs work because we in general don't know how the brain works (which is true)

Says all doctors have no idea why drugs work (isn't true)

Points out some PCP's and Internists don't do studies or research (true)

Says doctors aren't scientists and that none of them do research (isn't true)

Do we see the pattern yet?

Mist gonna Mist.
 
Kirun

Kirun

Buzzfeed Editor
19,235
15,625
Don't worry, she'll eventually start moving the goalposts back toward the middle, once enough people point out how intellectually dishonest she's being. Or, rather than concede the fact that she went full retard, she'll get emotional and claim arguing about things just isn't worth it on these forums, in some angst-ridden rant. Somehow, she might even find a way to blame it all on mommy.
 
Furry

Furry

🌭🍔🇺🇦✌️SLAVA UKRAINI!✌️🇺🇦🍔🌭
<Gold Donor>
21,886
28,606
Tolan_sl said:
Not necessarily.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but I consider gravitational anomaly mapping extremely compelling evidence in favor of my statement. I know in the MATH that the fields don't rotate, but that doesn't match real world observations.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
According to Mist, she works for the worst school in the US. So her statements of "all undergrads have to cheat to pass" and "pretty much all research is done by grad students who get their work stolen by their professors" and "doctors just kinda make shit up as they go" might just be views from her school.

In actuality though, I think that her school is probably fine and like everything else, Mist only sees the worst and then extrapolates her shit-colored goggles to everything else.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
47,359
80,745
Possibly related to the above, it's funny talking with different doctors about cutting edge medicine. Among general practitioners there are a lot of great doctors who keep abreast of new findings (new begin in the last ten years!) and a lot that basically stopped giving a shit decades ago. They just need to go through their job and anything surprising they give a referall to a specialist. I think this is ok.
 
P

Pinch_sl

shitlord
232
0
In fairness, as a scientist, I will readily argue that the vast majority of physicians aren't scientists. And I say that because my day-to-day revolves 100% around my research. I'm either at the lab performing experiments, or analyzing data from these experiments, or writing papers or grants to support existing and future experiments. My entire focus is on making new scientific discoveries and creating new knowledge. That is the routine of a typical scientist. A typical doctor is focused on treating patients, not creating new scientific knowledge. Of course, there is some overlap. Some doctors become primarily scientists, though that is quite rare. In general, people with MDs are working on patients because that's what they are trained to do. Similarly, a scientist has a completely different set of skills.

I think a lot of the disagreement here is due to the definition of "scientist," but there is some sort of an industry standard definition that generally doesn't include physicians.
 
N

Neph_sl

shitlord
1,635
0
Physician-scientists are a thing though. Sure, general practitioners probably don't care about research, but the specialists they send you to when you have something more complicated than the flu should totally care. Retrospective studies on what works and doesn't work is critical, from what I understand. See UpToDate.com
 
AngryGerbil

AngryGerbil

Poet Warrior
<Donor>
17,781
25,897
I suppose I am bound by my own life to consider a practitioner of scientific medicine to be a 'scientist' in a loose sense. I remember the time we had a lady with chest pain and shortness of breath and were asked to wait outside while the M.B. Preacher blessed, worshipped, prayed, and generally wasted time which absolutely guaranteed that more heart tissue had a chance to irreveribly die. I said to my partner at the time, 'science taking a back seat to religion, again.' In that sense I was *absolutely* a 'scientist'. Compared to a test tube guy in a lab I'm not, but compared to that Jesus magician I most certainly am.

My point is just that there is a spectrum not a perfect binary. Science can inform our understanding of societies, and if a practitioner of social science is using actual evidence or data then I would consider them a scientist as much as any PCP. I suppose it's all relative. Even the Jungians are scientists when compared to stuff like faith healing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.