Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Junk science

Rate this topic


Seanjos

Recommended Posts

Although my PhD is a few years away, I'm suddenly panicked at the idea of starting my new course, and neglecting the ills of science education.

Peikoff wrote of the terrible habits he picked up in grad school. I'm concerned, like Peikoff, that the work ahead will be so time consuming and difficult that things will start to slip by me. Rationalising and chiefly, what is killing science: "picking up where the last man left off".

Could anyone reccommend some pre-term training for me ? I start back in September.

Thanks

Edited by Seanjos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is your major?

At least in my experience I don't know what kind of bad habits you can pick up from grad school. Most real science/engineering courses I've taken were straight down to business and had no "junk science" at all. Now, anything outside the engineering college is a different story though... :dough:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the same holds true in biomedical sciences. I can't really think of any classes where they teach us flat out wrong things, or real propaganda. I mean, you have some of the biofuels stuff if you are a biotech major, but if you're in the medical fields I don't really see much of it as long as you steer clear of the ethics courses =)

The courses that teach you how to better apply for government funding are kinda mixed, but at the same time that's pretty much the only way to get money these days so I don't think you can consider it bad to learn how to do that.... You kind of have to in academic research environments if you want to succeed at all, or survive for that matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exercise- Biomechanics, Kinesiology and Physiology.

Oh, wow. I'm an exercise physiology buff myself and had previously intended to get a Ph.D. until I realized how corrupt the field is.

You wouldn't happed to subscribe to the H.I.T. school of thought, would you? I know Objectivism is popular among the H.I.T. crowd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

until I realized how corrupt the field is.

You wouldn't happed to subscribe to the H.I.T. school of thought, would you? I know Objectivism is popular among the H.I.T. crowd.

Yes, I discovered Objectivism through Mike Mentzer, he mentions her in all his work. Imagine my delight at finding a book on my favourite subject when I was 18 which stressed need for understanding the laws of logic, the law of identity and excluding the arbitrary. I knew then that something was wrong with the scene. Exercise Scientists didn't write in this tone; Mentzer didn't even go to college. :lol:

I have one of his seminars on tape, " Y'know PhD stands for, Piled High an' Deep in BULLSHIT"? I'll never forget that.

Scores of men much smarter than him who have doctorates write subjective, opinionated and contradictory tomes. If I can't identify the cause there is nothing stopping this happening to me.

Upon writing this I've realised, what I'm concerned about is not so much junk science, as my method of thinking. Could just a more thorough study of Logic be the answer ? I don't want to lose anymore sleep on this.

p.s

Click on my name for his photo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Click on my name for his photo

Ah, I should've seen that :lol:

Mentzer was also my first exposure to Objectivism, although I did not accept it as a result of his influence. Instead, I thought he came off like a nut.

Later, when my interest in politics and economics led me to seriously consider Objectivism, I realized he was right. Although, I'm still not sure that I approve of the attempt to associate H.I.T. with Objectivism - I think this tends to have the effect of turning people away from both philosophies. Most people, even sincere ones, simply cannot understand what the hell Menzter and Johnston are talking about and inevitably come away with bad impressions, as I did. You are the exception.

I assume you've read Arthur Jones' stuff. It's amazing how closely his life and opinions approximate Objectivism even though he was not an Objectivist.

As far as not becoming corrupt yourself goes, I think your awareness of the problem, and your philosophical grounding should be all the protection you need.

H.I.T. needs someone to carry the flag for Ellington Darden, and it can only be done by someone within the mainstream establishment, someone with the credentials needed to be taken seriously and have a voice in the field. Take that vision with you as you proceed with your studeies. Hell, Dareden got ass rich promoting HIT, and you can too.

Edited by cliveandrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of an amateur's interest, what is HIT, and why is the field of exercise physiology corrupt?

HIT (High Intensity Training) is a heterodox system of physical training which parallels Objectivism in many ways. It is utterly despised in the mainstream fitness arena, mainly because it indicts other training methods. You could say it's the Austrain economics of exercise physiology.

Exercise physiology is corrupt for a lot of reasons, the least of which is that it primarily attracts jocks rather than scientists. Undergrad exercise physiology is more like glorified P.E. than anything resembling a hard science. Overall the field is pretty much comparable to what is going on in other fields like economics, philosophy, political science, etc. It's an intellectual cesspool.

Edited by cliveandrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Clive, perhaps also, I just needed some encouragement. Like the men you mentioned, I'll remain honest and just like them, have a very lonely career. But I will be right and what greater joy can I get than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...