Moderna Covid vaccine candidate almost 95% effective, trials show

Re:Moderna Covid vaccine candidate almost 95% effective, tri... by hutzlibu on Tuesday November 17, 2020 @06:26AM (#25122481)

"ut unless we are content to let human knowledge dissolve into meaninglessness, we must look to something external to our own reasoning to help decide what to believe. For me, I have drawn that line at Scientific Consensus because it has proved the most robust tool humanity has ever found for determining what is actually true"

Well, I agree with the scientific consensus on a general base. But since science was not always right, I don't see a valid argument from there to censorship.

You want to censor ideas not covered by scientific consensus?

"and their answers should sit uncomfortably in all humans"

Because, also no. I do not feel uncomfortable. I am strongly against censorship. Open, unrestricted exchange of ideas. If the scientific way is the best (which I believe), then the crackpot approaches will fail naturally. But if you censor those other approaches, you might actually strenghten them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Moderna Covid vaccine candidate almost 95% effective, tri... by wussboy on Tuesday November 17, 2020 @09:53AM (#25124338)

Your plan is reasonable if human minds were genuinely and effectively open to letting the best ideas win. But they are not. Human minds care more about reputation than veracity and this has important ramifications for plans like yours: namely that they don’t work. Confirmation bias is real and pervasive and as completely in control of my mind as it is of yours. I encourage you to read Haidt’s The Righteous Mind and see if what you purpose still makes sense.

[ Parent | on HN ]