Reflections on Rationalia - Neil deGrasse Tyson

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member



This article is NDTs defense of this tweet and I thought it was fantastic! Particularly this bit at the end;

"In Rationalia, the Constitution stipulates that a body of convincing evidence needs to exist in support of an idea before any Policy can established based on it. In such a country, data gathering, careful observations, and experimentation would be happening all the time, influencing practically every aspect of our modern lives. As a result, Rationalia would lead the world in discovery, because discovery would be built into the DNA of how the government operates, and how its citizens think.

In Rationalia, the sciences that study human behavior (psychology, sociology, neuroscience, anthropology, economics, etc) would be heavily funded since much of our understanding of how we interact with one another derives from research within subfields of these disciplines. Because their subjects involve humans, these fields are particularly susceptible to social & cultural bias. So the verifiability of evidence will be of highest concern.

In Rationalia, since weight of evidence is built into the Constitution, everyone would be trained from an early age how to obtain and analyze evidence, and how to draw conclusions from it.

In Rationalia, you would have complete freedom to be irrational. You just don’t have the freedom to base policy on your ideas if the weight of evidence does not support it. For this reason, Rationalia might just be the freest country in the world

In Rationalia, for example, if you want to introduce capital punishment you’d need to propose a reason for it. If the reason is to deter murder, then an entire research machine would be put into place (if it did not already exist) to see whether, in fact, capital punishment deters murder. If it does not, then your proposed policy fails, and we move on to other proposals.

In Rationalia, if you want to fund art in schools, you simply propose a reason why. Does it increase creativity in the citizenry? Is creativity good for culture and society at large? Is creativity good for everyone no matter your chosen profession? These are testable questions. They just require verifiable research to establish answers. And then, the debate ends quickly in the face of evidence, and we move on to other questions.

In Rationalia, citizens would pity newscasters for presenting their opinions as facts. Everyone would have a heightened capacity to spot bullshit wherever and whenever it arose.

In Rationalia, a diverse, pluralistic land, you are free to practice religion. You would just have a hard-time basing policy on it. Policy, by most intended meanings of the word, are rules that apply to everyone, but most religions have rules that apply only to themselves.

In Rationalia, research in psychology and neuroscience would establish what level risks we are all willing to take, and how much freedom we might need to forfeit, in exchange for comfort, health, wealth and security.

In Rationalia, you could create an Office of Morality, where moral codes are proposed and debated. What moral codes would the citizens of Rationalia embrace? That is, itself, a research project. Countries don’t always get it right, of course. And neither will Rationalia. Is slavery moral? The USA's Constitution thought so for 76 years. Should women vote? The USA’s Constitution said no for 131 years.

If we learn later that Rationalia’s Constitution needs additional Amendments, then you can be sure there will be evidence in support of it."


Your thoughts on this?
 

cat of curiosity

Well-Known Member



This article is NDTs defense of this tweet and I thought it was fantastic! Particularly this bit at the end;

"In Rationalia, the Constitution stipulates that a body of convincing evidence needs to exist in support of an idea before any Policy can established based on it. In such a country, data gathering, careful observations, and experimentation would be happening all the time, influencing practically every aspect of our modern lives. As a result, Rationalia would lead the world in discovery, because discovery would be built into the DNA of how the government operates, and how its citizens think.

In Rationalia, the sciences that study human behavior (psychology, sociology, neuroscience, anthropology, economics, etc) would be heavily funded since much of our understanding of how we interact with one another derives from research within subfields of these disciplines. Because their subjects involve humans, these fields are particularly susceptible to social & cultural bias. So the verifiability of evidence will be of highest concern.

In Rationalia, since weight of evidence is built into the Constitution, everyone would be trained from an early age how to obtain and analyze evidence, and how to draw conclusions from it.

In Rationalia, you would have complete freedom to be irrational. You just don’t have the freedom to base policy on your ideas if the weight of evidence does not support it. For this reason, Rationalia might just be the freest country in the world

In Rationalia, for example, if you want to introduce capital punishment you’d need to propose a reason for it. If the reason is to deter murder, then an entire research machine would be put into place (if it did not already exist) to see whether, in fact, capital punishment deters murder. If it does not, then your proposed policy fails, and we move on to other proposals.

In Rationalia, if you want to fund art in schools, you simply propose a reason why. Does it increase creativity in the citizenry? Is creativity good for culture and society at large? Is creativity good for everyone no matter your chosen profession? These are testable questions. They just require verifiable research to establish answers. And then, the debate ends quickly in the face of evidence, and we move on to other questions.

In Rationalia, citizens would pity newscasters for presenting their opinions as facts. Everyone would have a heightened capacity to spot bullshit wherever and whenever it arose.

In Rationalia, a diverse, pluralistic land, you are free to practice religion. You would just have a hard-time basing policy on it. Policy, by most intended meanings of the word, are rules that apply to everyone, but most religions have rules that apply only to themselves.

In Rationalia, research in psychology and neuroscience would establish what level risks we are all willing to take, and how much freedom we might need to forfeit, in exchange for comfort, health, wealth and security.

In Rationalia, you could create an Office of Morality, where moral codes are proposed and debated. What moral codes would the citizens of Rationalia embrace? That is, itself, a research project. Countries don’t always get it right, of course. And neither will Rationalia. Is slavery moral? The USA's Constitution thought so for 76 years. Should women vote? The USA’s Constitution said no for 131 years.

If we learn later that Rationalia’s Constitution needs additional Amendments, then you can be sure there will be evidence in support of it."


Your thoughts on this?
stay out of level 5

EUREKA!
 

Rrog

Well-Known Member
US Constitution was not written by fantastically enlightened men. Actually most were pathetically petty and childish. We have embellished their roles so it sounds great when politicians hearken the days of old and call on Jefferson (one of the worst presidents we've ever had) etc.

The US could just have easily become another monarchy, as all these motherfuckers put ass-grabbin on hold while they converted to land-grabbin.
 

Trippyness

Well-Known Member
You prefer to believe the earth is flat?
I prefer to believe what evidence I see. What is testable without reference to fact that is not biased.
I would rather not go down the Flat rabbit hole at this time.
Regardless of what I believe, NASA and every space program is surly lying and not very at it.
 

Rrog

Well-Known Member
I prefer to believe what evidence I see. What is testable without reference to fact that is not biased.
I would rather not go down the Flat rabbit hole at this time.
Regardless of what I believe, NASA and every space program is surly lying and not very at it.
Who gives a shit how deluded you are?? Seriously- you may as well be trying to convince folks you're really a kangaroo. Does not matter an iota that you can vigorously post on the internet. Not an iota. Tell us about NASA, tell us about your little furry ears, tell us all nations space programs are in on the game, tell us about that cool tail of yours.
 

Trippyness

Well-Known Member
Who gives a shit how deluded you are?? Seriously- you may as well be trying to convince folks you're really a kangaroo. Does not matter an iota that you can vigorously post on the internet. Not an iota. Tell us about NASA, tell us about your little furry ears, tell us all nations space programs are in on the game, tell us about that cool tail of yours.
I would, however you wouldn't listen regardless.
As for me being delusional, quite the opposite.
Grad Organic Chem student at a major Canadian University.
Take it for what its worth.
I can see when people will refuse facts. I see it daily.
If you have an open mind have a look deeper, if not stay the same.
Regards Trippy.
 

Rrog

Well-Known Member
Intelligent people can be deluded also. It's not an intellect level thing. Like the professor stalking Sandy Hook parents. Clearly a whack job, yet educated.

While idiots are certainly easier to fool, that's just trickery. No, when one has the facts and chooses to go Flat-Earth on us, well then, you're back to an intelligent delusional person who's educated.
 
Top