Scientific dataNörobilim
According to the American Stroke Association, the ischemic stroke accounts for approximately 83% of all strokes….The hemorrhagic stroke occurs when blood escapes from the arteries and floods into the brain. Seventeen percent of all strokes are hemorrhagic.
Bilgisayar bilimci Jaron Lanier'ın makaleye* karşılık olarak belirttiği gibi, bazı kocakarı ilaçları hiç kimse sebebini açıklayamasa da işe yarar. Fakat kocakarı ilaçlarının bilim olarak görülmemesinin nedeni tam da budur. "Bilimin işi anlamaktır," diye yazar Lanier.
* "The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete" [Teorinin Sonu: Veri Tufanı Bilimsel Yöntemi Tedavülden Kaldırdı] isimli dobra makale.
(Dobra yazarın vurgusu)
I have little doubt that the climate is changing rapidly and that this is due to humankind’s actions; and I am confident that if we don’t all work together to change the way we live our lives, then the future of humanity is in peril. I base my view on overwhelming and incontrovertible scientific evidence that comes from many different areas of science: climate data, oceanography, atmospheric science, biodiversity, computer modelling and so on. Imagine being dissatisfied with the prognosis of your doctor and not just seeking a second opinion from another qualified physician, but getting a third, fourth and fifth opinion, with all of them telling you the same thing, all backed up by irrefutable supporting evidence, such as blood tests, scans and X-rays. That is why I hold the view I do about climate change.
But ma
Rather than being elementary logical or methodological distinctions, which would thus be prior to the analysis of scientific knowledge, they now seem integral parts of a traditional set of substantive answers to the very questions upon which they have been deployed. That circularity does not at all invalidate them. But it does make them parts of a theory and, by doing so, subjects them to the same scrutiny regularly applied to theories in other fields. If they are to have more than pure abstraction as their content, then that content must be discovered by observing them in application to the data they are meant to elucidate. How could history of science fail to be a source of phenomena to which theories about knowledge may legitimately be asked to apply?
aptallığın analizi1000Kitap
Cultural trends now fashionable in the West favor an egalitarian approach
to life. People like to think of human beings as the output of a perfectly
engineered mass production machine. Geneticists and sociologists especially go out of their way to prove, with an impressive apparatus of scientific data and formulations, that all men are naturally equal and if some are more equal than the others, this is attributable to nurture and not to nature.
I take exception to this general view. It is my firm conviction, supported by years of observation and experimentation, that men are not equal, that some are stupid and others are not and that the difference is determined by nature and not by cultural forces or factors. One is stupid in the same way one is red-haired; one belongs to the stupid set as one belongs to a blood group. A stupid man is born a stupid man by an act of Providence.
Ethics differs from science in the fact that its fundamental data are feelings and emotions, not percepts. This is to be understood strictly; that is to say, the data are the feelings and emotions themselves, not the fact that we have them. The fact that we have them is a scientific fact like another, and we become aware of it by perception, in the usual scientific way. But an ethical judgment does not state a fact; it states, though often in a disguised form, some hope or fear, some desire or aversion, some love or hate.
