-2

When Noam Chomsky was asked about what he thought about the collapse of building 7 at the University of Florida in 2013, he replied that only a minuscule part of the scientific community backed up the controlled demolition theory. ref here

Other less popular philosophers such us David Ray Griffin have demanded a new 9/11 investigation for years. ref here

Does a minority imply 'wrong' when it comes to the scientific community? Have there been any other cases of scientific discrepancies based on empirical evidence being dismissed by democratic resolutions? Does democracy and truth go hand in hand or people are easily manipulated by feeling instead of reason?

"Even if truth who cares" Noam Chomsky ref here

Improve this question
9
  • 4
    There are many examples of the minority view prevailing in science. For example, Plank, and then Einstein's, introduction of quantized energy to explain the ultraviolet catastrophe. Plank himself viewed it as a mathematical trick only. Regarding the video you have linked, Chomsky is not simply arguing that the majority view should be trusted. He is questioning why those architects and engineers who suggest a conspiracy do not present their evidence in peer reviewed scientific journals. Rather, he says they spend there time trying to convince people without a scientific background.
    – nwr
    Commented Sep 10, 2019 at 18:36
  • 1
    @Davidblomstrom Yeah the deletes are quite arbitrary and irrational
    – Rushi
    Commented Sep 11, 2019 at 3:48
  • We shouldn't be too quick to close this question: there is a philosophically interesting question (highlighted) at the heart of it.
    – christo183
    Commented Sep 11, 2019 at 6:23
  • also may be worth noting that einstein was a total genius @NickR
    – user38026
    Commented Sep 11, 2019 at 6:25
  • @NickR Gravity is a conspiracy theory welcome to the fake news era.
    – user22051
    Commented Sep 11, 2019 at 6:30

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0

Is Noam's Logic legit?

No, it's not. Opinion and logic do not go hand in hand. Heliocentrism, relativity, evolution were refused and ridiculed at first then accepted. The human mind has trouble adapting itself to changes particularly after centuries of indoctrination or general misconception. See troubles with revolutions of the mind.

Does a minority imply 'wrong' when it comes to the scientific community? Have there been any other cases of scientific discrepancies based on empirical evidence being dismissed by democratic resolutions?

The scientific community is not based on democracy but in the scientific method. ref here. Keep in mind that we are going through the "fake news" era in which science and philosophy are deeply corrupted. This is also a revolution of the mind philosophers themselves have trouble accepting even in these western "anglo-philosophy" forums. See corruption in modern science here

Does democracy and truth go hand in hand or people are easily manipulated by feeling instead of reason?

The history of demagogy is not recent ref here. Now as the internet is used world wide techniques of information vs disinformation are blatantly used to manipulate people's perception and ultimately their reality. Some would argue that what we have now in the western world are not democracies but plutocracies in which credibility and information control are valuable commodities.

Not everybody is prepared to look for the truth because it takes time to develop critical thinking skills. Detaching yourself emotionally to have a clear judgement from certain ideas eg. (history, nationalism, religion) is not easily accomplished. Also the mind as studied in modern psychology has whole list of cognitive biases and it's necessary to train yourself to be aware of them. List here

“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” Mark Twain

Improve this answer
9
  • 1
    Aren't you confusing logic with opinion? The majority opinion may be wrong, but that is not part of logic, and there is nothing wrong with the logic that a majority opinion is more likely to be right than a minority one, geocentricism, relativity, evolution (and many other examples) notwithstanding. In the end, the only way for us to judge if the scientific method was properly applied is to form an opinion about it. And the law of large numbers makes minorities more likely to form erroneous opinions. And when they did prove it right, it was by convincing a majority of experts first.
    – Conifold
    Commented Sep 12, 2019 at 11:45
  • 1
    Majority or minorities are not valid inferences to look for the truth, they are opinions.
    – user22051
    Commented Sep 12, 2019 at 11:48
  • 1
    Of course not, but without them you are left with your personal opinions. Are you an expert in architecture and engineering? If not, on what basis will you personally judge the evidence?
    – Conifold
    Commented Sep 12, 2019 at 11:51
  • 1
    @Conifold i'm not allowed to discuss that in here. It's just elementary physics. Truth is a personal commitment.
    – user22051
    Commented Sep 12, 2019 at 12:57
  • 1
    But you are allowed to discuss Chomsky's logic in your answer, indeed you must given your own question. And he is not an expert in architecture and engineering. Not everybody is equipped to look for the truth on their own, whether they are "prepared" or not. Then there is nothing illogical in relying on opinions of others, indeed it is a necessity. And people have to choose which ones one way or another.
    – Conifold
    Commented Sep 12, 2019 at 19:47

You must log in to answer this question.