Print Page   |   Contact Us   |   Sign In   |   Join ASA or sign up
Sign In


Calendar

6/21/2018 » 6/23/2018
“Bioethics and Being Human,” Deerfield, IL

6/30/2018
Call for Papers for “Being human in a technological age,” Pretoria, South Africa

7/11/2018
“Will the Machines Take Over? Human Uniqueness in the Age of Smart Machines,” Seattle, WA

7/27/2018 » 7/30/2018
2018 ASA Annual Meeting

8/13/2018 » 8/14/2018
“Our Place in the Cosmos?: Humanity, Spirituality, and the Awesome Universe,” Saskatoon, SK

Episode 5 "Hiding in the Light"
Moderator(s):
|<
<
1 |
2
Thread Actions

4/10/2014 at 7:08:10 PM GMT
Posts: 53
Your "highly selective skepticism" or just "skepticism" would be fine compared to the more ambiguous "Question all authority" appeal. My personal choice would probably be the application of "scientific scrutiny" since it is more focused on the objective case rather than the subjective feel with the word "authority".

I recently read a book about the dark nebulae in space. Surprisingly, it took the astronomical community about 80 years to finally recognize that the dark blotches in the heavens were not simply regions that are void of stars, as suggested by William Herschel -- an authority figure especially after his discovery of the first planet in recorded history (Uranus). Yet it was an authority figure (Eddington) that helped make the correction. Scientific scrutiny, had they been more interested in the topic to begin with, would have sufficed.


Last edited Thursday, April 10, 2014