Dissecting the Myth of Science

How can anyone be "sure" of anything? It is possible, but not "scientifically"

But how did he know?

---

In May, 2023, I responded to William M. Briggs:

The Taboos & Magical Beliefs Of Primitives And Science

In my response at the time, I briefly discussed the “science” regarding racism, the way beliefs limit the application of logic, how thinking about “covid” is affected, and how faith complements scientific thought:

This time, I am responding to the same author’s recent article that explored paths to interpret trends in statistics of popular faith in science. Such faith, when forced on the people, usually serves ideological purposes, disguised as something authoritatively scientific, while the myth of “scientific knowledge” is elevated to the highest pedestal of human cognition:

Trust In Science Drops: Good

Shortly after I started my stack, I called my readers’ attention to the otherwise well-known manipulative initiative that tells common folks to shut up when “scientists” talk, and stop thinking, because all they must do is accept the declarations of the new priesthood, whose members include the “experts,” the “researchers,” and the “scientists”:

Human knowledge is limited, but only a few know its limitations

When it comes to human knowledge, it hasn’t advanced much since Socrates, who realistically stated,

“All I know is that I know nothing.”

Many people claim that one can know “the Truth.” That would have been considered a heresy in most places in history, and it still is, because the “scientist” has been assigned “to know,” and commoners are not welcome to voicing their opinion. So much about the Freedom of Speech:

Science is looking for facts, not the truth; it operates at the level of perception and applies logic to its findings. It has always relied on shaky foundations, and more often than not, it’s a farce:

https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/freaks-of-science

People, however, find their feelings, intuitions, and existential needs a lot more convincing, at least for themselves. Ultimately, the Truth is an existential matter, which is the only cognitive level where Free Will can operate, albeit it’s hardly ever given a chance, because people acting on their conditioning are convinced they make their choices freely:

https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/i-have-solved-the-question-of-free

If science is a farce, statistics is a travesty. Think about the devastation of doctors following (usually tainted) statistics or, on a more public platform, politicians, who stifle the best interests of their electorate with the idea of “democracy.” People need inalienable rights, because the majority is usually wrong. Natural rights that cannot be granted must not be taken away are guaranteed by a functional Constitution; without such rights, “democracy,” as Aristotle noted in Politics, is the most despicable form of government, because it’s the rule of the mob. Well, the Constitution cannot save “democracy,” because democracy still remains the most corrupt and least transparent form of government:

In fact, once the futility of perception and logic becomes apparent on the domain of answering questions about “the Truth,” the only certainty is that people find things true, because they need them to be true to survive (e.g. in Stockholm syndrome) or to give meaning to their existence (any religion). The inconvenient part is that there is no escape from the choice:

Trusting science works as long as it does, but putting hope in it is a fallacy. Hope must never precede trust of faith:

https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/perhaps-the-greatest-finding-of-the

For gnostics, moral relativists, and the purely inquisitive, I prepared the following, rather exhaustive text:

For now, let me share a strategy that forces dedicated representatives of evil (or stupidity) to give themselves away without even noticing: