Quote:
Originally Posted by MTVN
Well in pretty much anything, scientists should really base their conclusions on their research but you'll often get those who base their research on trying to justify whatever preconceived ideas they hold. Like how historically the Nazis would use apparent science to support their claims of racial supremacy, or more recently how scientists have been shown to distort their findings for greater evidence of climate change. You could also say the fact there are Christian scientists proves this, that they maybe gear their research towards trying to show that scientific findings are not incompatible with their religion.
Not that this would just apply to science of course, it happens in everything, you see it a lot in history as well where people's political persuasions will influence the way they interpret certain events
|
I wouldn't class cognitive dissonance as an agenda, necessarily, but you've raised some interesting points.
That nazi science you mentioned is actually a good example of how exactly science works. As scientists learned more about the physiological/cognitive/biological make up of our species, then old disciplines, such as eugenics were left behind. It's also important to remember what they were actually there to do - they didn't have to tender for grants from science organisations - they were given people to experiment on, and brainwashed into an ideology of occultism and norse blood mythology.
I'm not too sure there were any scientists that exaggerated their findings on climate change. I remember the story well, but not the finer details, and I also remember a massive investigation being done into examining those emails, and after looking at the complete sets of emails, there was nothing found that was either wrong played up. We may be talking about different things with this one, and you may have a better recollection of that issue than I do, so I accept I could be wrong.
Science is such a long winded process these days, that agenda's are weeded out pretty quickly.