I was considering doing a paper on that recent Georgia schoolboard decision about Creation, but that seemed too easy. My roommate told me about one of his professors attending a seminar where the issue was: can science ever really prove anything? So far, that one seems pretty good, but it might be hard to research. Maybe one of you have heard one of your professors mention something along these lines?
Have any of you encountered any raging debates about science? Need a topic for my philosophy of science class...
- Thread starter Spoooon
- Start date
In the arena of "can you prove science?" you could look at positivism vs. Karl Popper.
Science by falsification (Popper):
No scientific theory can every truly be proven true--"The Problem of Induction"--but theories or aspects thereof can be proven false (outline)
vs. "logical positivism" (www.m-w.com)
"a 20th century philosophical movement that holds characteristically that all meaningful statements are either analytic or conclusively verifiable or at least confirmable by observation and experiment and that metaphysical theories are therefore strictly meaningless"
Science by falsification (Popper):
No scientific theory can every truly be proven true--"The Problem of Induction"--but theories or aspects thereof can be proven false (outline)
vs. "logical positivism" (www.m-w.com)
"a 20th century philosophical movement that holds characteristically that all meaningful statements are either analytic or conclusively verifiable or at least confirmable by observation and experiment and that metaphysical theories are therefore strictly meaningless"
Define "science debate". It might not be what you're looking for, but the one that gets me riled is the notion that HIV does not cause AIDS. Dr. Peter Duesberg is a big proponent of this notion, as well as some activist groups. Together, they're trying to convince people to stop taking their drug cocktails, as well as discouraging the governments in developing countries to discontinue use of AZT for HIV+ pregnant women.
That's an interesting one. Do you have any links to some pertinent articles? I've heard nothing of this.
edit: Essentially, I need something that would be a topic pertaining to philosophy of science. For example, is Creation Science a legitimate science? Or with this HIV thing, I could discuss the whys and why nots about HIV causing AIDS and why they are advising people to not take their drugs. I also need to be able to pick a side and defend it. The Creation Science, and right now the AIDS thing, would be pretty easy to defend.
Here's the homepage of Dr. Duesberg:
http://www.duesberg.com/index.html
Here's his Bekeley page:
http://mcb.berkeley.edu/faculty/BMB/duesbergp.html
He works mostly on cancer, but at the bottom you'll see a paragraph on his notions. I included the abstract of his Genetica article at the bottom of my post (unfortunately, there's no direct link). The same journal has a response to each of his 13 claims. I you are interested in the articles, PM me (I go to Berkeley, so I have access).
Here's a bunch of links:
http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/aids.html
I don't know any of the activist groups by name, but I know there's at least one in San Francisco. Just do some Google searches, and I'm sure you'll find info. If you need any specific info, PM me. Also, I think the Goo Goo Dolls or some band is spreading a similar notion.
By the way, I do believe HIV causes AIDS. And while I respect scientific challenges that may go against dogma (Earth is flat, center of universe, etc.), their claims are weak and often unfounded (though they are written pretty convincingly). Worse yet, these actions have the ability to further hurt those already afflicted.
ABSTRACT:
Almost two decades of unprecedented efforts in research costing US taxpayers over $50 billion have failed to defeat Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) and have failed to explain the chronology and epidemiology of AIDS in America and Europe. The failure to cure AIDS is so complete that the largest American AIDS foundation is even exploiting it for fundraising: ?Latest AIDS statistics ? 0,000,000 cured. Support a cure, support AMFAR.? The scientific basis of all these unsuccessful efforts has been the hypothesis that AIDS is caused by a sexually transmitted virus, termed Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and that this viral immunodeficiency manifests in 30 previously known microbial and non-microbial AIDS diseases. In order to develop a hypothesis that explains AIDS we have considered ten relevant facts that American and European AIDS patients have, and do not have, in common: (1) AIDS is not contagious. For example, not even one health care worker has contracted AIDS from over 800,000 AIDS patients in America and Europe. (2) AIDS is highly non-random with regard to sex (86% male); sexual persuasion (over 60% homosexual); and age (85% are 25?49 years old). (3) From its beginning in 1980, the AIDS epidemic progressed non-exponentially, just like lifestyle diseases. (4) The epidemic is fragmented into distinct subepidemics with exclusive AIDS-defining diseases. For example, only homosexual males have Kaposi?s sarcoma. (5) Patients do not have any one of 30 AIDS-defining diseases, nor even immunodeficiency, in common. For example, Kaposi?s sarcoma, dementia, and weight loss may occur without immunodeficiency. Thus, there is no AIDS-specific disease. (6) AIDS patients have antibody against HIV in common only by definition?not by natural coincidence. AIDS-defining diseases of HIV-free patients are called by their old names. (7) Recreational drug use is a common denominator for over 95% of all American and European AIDS patients, including male homosexuals. (8) Lifetime prescriptions of inevitably toxic anti-HIV drugs, such as the DNA chain-terminator AZT, are another common denominator of AIDS patients. (9) HIV proves to be an ideal surrogate marker for recreational and anti-HIV drug use. Since the virus is very rare (< 0.3%) in the US/European population and very hard to transmit sexually, only those who inject street drugs or have over 1,000 typically drug-mediated sexual contacts are likely to become positive. (10) The huge AIDS literature cannot offer even one statistically significant group of drug-free AIDS patients from America and Europe. In view of this, we propose that the long-term consumption of recreational drugs (such as cocaine, heroin, nitrite inhalants, and amphetamines) and prescriptions of DNA chain-terminating and other anti-HIV drugs, cause all AIDS diseases in America and Europe that exceed their long-established, national backgrounds, i.e. <95%. Chemically distinct drugs cause distinct AIDS-defining diseases; for example, nitrite inhalants cause Kaposi?s sarcoma, cocaine causes weight loss, and AZT causes immunodeficiency, lymphoma, muscle atrophy, and dementia. The drug hypothesis predicts that AIDS: (1) is non-contagious; (2) is non-random, because 85% of AIDS causing drugs are used by males, particularly sexually active homosexuals between 25 and 49 years of age, and (3) would follow the drug epidemics chronologically. Indeed, AIDS has increased from negligible numbers in the early 1980s to about 80,000 annual cases in the early ?90s and has since declined to about 50,000 cases (US figures). In the same period, recreational drug users have increased from negligible numbers to millions by the late 1980s, and have since decreased possibly twofold. However, AIDS has declined less because since 1987 increasing numbers of mostly healthy, HIV-positive people, currently about 200,000, use anti-HIV drugs that cause AIDS and other diseases. At least 64 scientific studies, government legislation, and non-scientific reports document that recreational drugs cause AIDS and other diseases. Likewise, the AIDS literature, the drug manufacturers, and non-scientific reports confirm that anti-HIV drugs cause AIDS and other diseases in humans and animals. In sum, the AIDS dilemma could be solved by banning anti-HIV drugs, and by pointing out that drugs cause AIDS ? modeled on the successful anti-smoking campaign.
http://www.duesberg.com/index.html
Here's his Bekeley page:
http://mcb.berkeley.edu/faculty/BMB/duesbergp.html
He works mostly on cancer, but at the bottom you'll see a paragraph on his notions. I included the abstract of his Genetica article at the bottom of my post (unfortunately, there's no direct link). The same journal has a response to each of his 13 claims. I you are interested in the articles, PM me (I go to Berkeley, so I have access).
Here's a bunch of links:
http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/aids.html
I don't know any of the activist groups by name, but I know there's at least one in San Francisco. Just do some Google searches, and I'm sure you'll find info. If you need any specific info, PM me. Also, I think the Goo Goo Dolls or some band is spreading a similar notion.
By the way, I do believe HIV causes AIDS. And while I respect scientific challenges that may go against dogma (Earth is flat, center of universe, etc.), their claims are weak and often unfounded (though they are written pretty convincingly). Worse yet, these actions have the ability to further hurt those already afflicted.
ABSTRACT:
Almost two decades of unprecedented efforts in research costing US taxpayers over $50 billion have failed to defeat Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) and have failed to explain the chronology and epidemiology of AIDS in America and Europe. The failure to cure AIDS is so complete that the largest American AIDS foundation is even exploiting it for fundraising: ?Latest AIDS statistics ? 0,000,000 cured. Support a cure, support AMFAR.? The scientific basis of all these unsuccessful efforts has been the hypothesis that AIDS is caused by a sexually transmitted virus, termed Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and that this viral immunodeficiency manifests in 30 previously known microbial and non-microbial AIDS diseases. In order to develop a hypothesis that explains AIDS we have considered ten relevant facts that American and European AIDS patients have, and do not have, in common: (1) AIDS is not contagious. For example, not even one health care worker has contracted AIDS from over 800,000 AIDS patients in America and Europe. (2) AIDS is highly non-random with regard to sex (86% male); sexual persuasion (over 60% homosexual); and age (85% are 25?49 years old). (3) From its beginning in 1980, the AIDS epidemic progressed non-exponentially, just like lifestyle diseases. (4) The epidemic is fragmented into distinct subepidemics with exclusive AIDS-defining diseases. For example, only homosexual males have Kaposi?s sarcoma. (5) Patients do not have any one of 30 AIDS-defining diseases, nor even immunodeficiency, in common. For example, Kaposi?s sarcoma, dementia, and weight loss may occur without immunodeficiency. Thus, there is no AIDS-specific disease. (6) AIDS patients have antibody against HIV in common only by definition?not by natural coincidence. AIDS-defining diseases of HIV-free patients are called by their old names. (7) Recreational drug use is a common denominator for over 95% of all American and European AIDS patients, including male homosexuals. (8) Lifetime prescriptions of inevitably toxic anti-HIV drugs, such as the DNA chain-terminator AZT, are another common denominator of AIDS patients. (9) HIV proves to be an ideal surrogate marker for recreational and anti-HIV drug use. Since the virus is very rare (< 0.3%) in the US/European population and very hard to transmit sexually, only those who inject street drugs or have over 1,000 typically drug-mediated sexual contacts are likely to become positive. (10) The huge AIDS literature cannot offer even one statistically significant group of drug-free AIDS patients from America and Europe. In view of this, we propose that the long-term consumption of recreational drugs (such as cocaine, heroin, nitrite inhalants, and amphetamines) and prescriptions of DNA chain-terminating and other anti-HIV drugs, cause all AIDS diseases in America and Europe that exceed their long-established, national backgrounds, i.e. <95%. Chemically distinct drugs cause distinct AIDS-defining diseases; for example, nitrite inhalants cause Kaposi?s sarcoma, cocaine causes weight loss, and AZT causes immunodeficiency, lymphoma, muscle atrophy, and dementia. The drug hypothesis predicts that AIDS: (1) is non-contagious; (2) is non-random, because 85% of AIDS causing drugs are used by males, particularly sexually active homosexuals between 25 and 49 years of age, and (3) would follow the drug epidemics chronologically. Indeed, AIDS has increased from negligible numbers in the early 1980s to about 80,000 annual cases in the early ?90s and has since declined to about 50,000 cases (US figures). In the same period, recreational drug users have increased from negligible numbers to millions by the late 1980s, and have since decreased possibly twofold. However, AIDS has declined less because since 1987 increasing numbers of mostly healthy, HIV-positive people, currently about 200,000, use anti-HIV drugs that cause AIDS and other diseases. At least 64 scientific studies, government legislation, and non-scientific reports document that recreational drugs cause AIDS and other diseases. Likewise, the AIDS literature, the drug manufacturers, and non-scientific reports confirm that anti-HIV drugs cause AIDS and other diseases in humans and animals. In sum, the AIDS dilemma could be solved by banning anti-HIV drugs, and by pointing out that drugs cause AIDS ? modeled on the successful anti-smoking campaign.
PowerEngineer
Diamond Member
- Oct 22, 2001
- 3,598
- 774
- 136
This may not actually be a raging debate about science, but I think the application of science in medicine poses a lot of interesting questions. On the one hand, there's good reason to follow strict scientific tesing protocols (i.e. double blind testing, etc) in the testing of new drugs and treatments. On the other hand, this long process to scientifically prove its efficacy means that many will suffer and die in the meantime. And the idea that half the "subjects" in a double blind study will not get what doctors believe might be a better treatment troubles me. How should the scientific standards for establishing truth be set for medicine?
PowerEngineer- that's a good idea, especially for something that there's not a clear-cut "right" or "wrong". I don't mean to start a theme here with my posts, but a specific example would be if there every were an HIV vaccine- how does one go about testing it? Do you purposely challenge an otherwise heathly person with a deadly virus? There was talk that they would give the vaccine and a placebo to high risk groups (IV drug users, prostitutes, etc.) and then monitor. Of course, is it morally right to give someone a placebo and yet have them think they are protected?
TOPIC: Should science be reigned in by ethics, or is knowledge distinct from the means of obtaining it? Possible example: results from Nazi experiments during WW2.
might be more of an ethics topic...
TOPIC: Should science be strictly material? Are abstract notions within the realm of scientific discussion? Consider geometric notions of "center", "surface", "edge", etc.
might be hard to do unless you've been discussing it in more detail.
TOPIC: What do modern scientific theories say about the notion of causality? Consider multidimensional theories, superstring theory, etc.
no idea if this is feasible, but sure sounds interesting to me!
might be more of an ethics topic...
TOPIC: Should science be strictly material? Are abstract notions within the realm of scientific discussion? Consider geometric notions of "center", "surface", "edge", etc.
might be hard to do unless you've been discussing it in more detail.
TOPIC: What do modern scientific theories say about the notion of causality? Consider multidimensional theories, superstring theory, etc.
no idea if this is feasible, but sure sounds interesting to me!
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter