• Mister Neon
    link
    fedilink
    181 year ago

    No. The problem with science is that in part it relies on trial and error. That could get messy on a societal level. We should utilize observation with scientific methods to inform our decisions. Unfortunately a lot of people don’t do that currently and scientific data results can also be manipulated to fulfill an agenda.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We have good models that offer up good decisions, so why put it to the vote?

      Base our policy on tested models. Audit our reasoning thoroughly. Be rational.

      Vs consult the masses, 99% of whom don’t even understand the question.

      Seems like a no brainer

      • Mister Neon
        link
        fedilink
        91 year ago

        Well in your scenario who will implement this? Furthermore, what is the goal that you’re trying to engineer with a science based government? Is it personal happiness, population numbers, the production of capital, or to indoctrinate the masses to serve the state? Are you going to justify the use of eugenics? What happens when goals conflict or individuals don’t want to participate in experiments? What if the science you’re implementing has different philosophies or different schools of thought? How do you determine what is the optimal method?

      • BolexForSoup
        link
        fedilink
        11
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What models are you suggesting we use that are making these good decisions?

        You’re using a lot of very general language throughout this thread. We need some elaboration. Otherwise it’s just “we should be logical and stuff.”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      Democracy could be said to work on trial an error too, just with human factors thrown into the mix?