- This is a video I wanted to make for a long time but every time I attempted to make it I found myself either veering too deep into metaphysics or not doing the subject matter justice. Another problem I experienced while attempting to script this video was in correctly striking a balance between the subject matter and exposition as to the significance of what it entails. As such I decided to put it aside until such a time as I felt that I had covered enough of the peripheral content in other videos as well as had developed my own skills in presentation to a higher level than it was a year ago when I had originally attempted this script. The last consideration was in building up a rapport with my audience sufficiently to not come across as a loon when I finally put this video out.
The subject matter of this video is focused around two very tightly related subjects; namely, modern technology and modern science. Within MGTOW and in the online world in general there is an undercurrent of science worship. This can be observed in the fact that that and only that which is scientific can be considered knowledge. We find this in the language of almost all of the more established MGTOW channels, the atheist community, and online critics in general.
The concept of a study pragmatically plays itself out as a synonym for truth. A study is also the defecto artifact considered as sufficient evidence for whatever proposition is put forward. The meme “citation needed” in many contexts is a call demanding the presentation of a study to justify a claim.
Before I dive into the heart of this video, I want to talk generally about what I have observed and the obvious epistemological problems that are grossly taken for granted among those who have elevated modern science to this high position of epistemological privilege.
Firstly, let us look at the concept of a study. For those who have been watching my channel for a while, you would have come to notice that I do not reference studies of any sort in my videos. My most popular videos are those composed of hand crafter logical arguments which I build up systematically by putting forward straight forward premises such as “All Women Are Hedonistic By Nature” and then building up my argument based on the consequences that must follow from such premises. Why I do not use studies in my videos will become apparent as you watch this video.
Let us dissect a study. A study has a hypothesis it attempts to either prove or disprove or attempts to answer some sort of broader question. During the study, the researcher gathers a dataset through empirical observation or a questionnaire based on a methodology he deems worthy. This data is then potentially put through some sort of statistical analysis that the researcher considers valid. Based on the result of this statistical analysis the researcher, through the application of some logical inference, draws a conclusion.
Finally, the study undergoes a peer review process during which other researchers in the field review that the methodology was used correctly, that the statistical methods selected were appropriate and potentially that the inferences drawn from the statistical analysis are correct.
This all sounds well and good; it sounds quite scientific does it not? After all this, our study is published and arrives in front of the eyes of readers around the world. Well, who are we in this cycle? Obviously we are the readers.
Now let me ask you a question. Let us say that you encounter the following assertion: “Women are smarter than men.” Now, would you believe this statement if some random women told you this or would you more likely believe this statement if it was the conclusion of a study? I would suspect that most people would fall into the second camp; they would more likely believe this statement to be true if it was the conclusion in a study.
But why would you choose the conclusion of a study over the random woman when epistemologically both sources of the assertion “Women are smarter than men” have equal justificatory weight? After all, to you, the layman, both sources are testimony. Let me clarify.
No comments:
Post a Comment