Dubstepforum.com

Found this to be a very interesting read: http://www.edge.org/responses/what-scie ... retirement

Scientists sent in their responses to the 2014 Edge question of what scientific idea they would most like to see retired. Some of the ideas included in the responses are: 'We'll Never Hit Barriers To Scientific Understanding'; 'Moore's Law'; 'Animal Mindlessness'; 'Only "Scientists" Can Do Science' (one of my favorites); 'Long-Term Memory Is Immutable'; 'Beauty is in the Eyes of the Beholder'; 'Common Sense'; 'Free Will'; 'Essentialism'; 'Behavior = Genes + Environment'; and 'Hard-Wired=Permanent' ('Left-Brain/Right-Brain' is actually in there more than once!).

Alphacat's thread about the left brain/right brain myth got me thinking about this and how interesting it would be to get some of your thoughts on what ideas you guys would like to see retired and why.

Read this one a few days ago.

The idea of a polarized universe where things can either be true or not true - where truth has objective reality instead of being the result of subjective perspective - that's gotta go.

The idea that a child's life is worth more than an adults.
Like with a building fire or whatever - oh we must save the children first!
Why? Are these kids close to curing cancer or helping with the signing a major peace treaty for the middle east? No. The stnuc don't even pay tax.

Time to retire the concept and activity of work.

Laz, fuck off - We've already experienced life, we've used it up. The little whipper snappers haven't, they deserve the chance more than we do.

As a father you are unable to think about it objectively and therefore your opinion is invalid.

I thought we already retired objectivity.

Laszlo wrote:The idea that a child's life is worth more than an adults.
Like with a building fire or whatever - oh we must save the children first!
Why? Are these kids close to curing cancer or helping with the signing a major peace treaty for the middle east? No. The stnuc don't even pay tax.

Leaving children aside for the moment, it seems rather sexist in this day and age that women take precedence over men. Women and children first? Pshaw! EVERYONE FOR THEMSELVES, SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST.

Other "scientific" ideas that I think could go away include the Selfish Gene, There's Not Much Left To Discover, New Physics, the lumping together of all forms of depression into one category, the Habitable/Goldilocks zone, Economics is a Science, It Can't Be Done and Fusion Is Only 30 Years Away.

All i'm saying is that the idea of a young person being inherently more valuable than an older person is ridiculous.

Child xyz - Aged eight. Has not achieved anything and is statistically unlikely to have any major impact on the human race.

Adult 123 - Aged forty-two. Head of a research team who is close to curing all cancer. Has a wife and two children.

Which should be saved first?


Kay - Really it should be hot women first closely followed by men of societal worth, then a sliding scale based on a point system for intelligence and attractiveness




then kids.

As someone who doesn't really distinguish between genders, I could find the notion of "hot people first closely followed by people of societal worth" to be acceptable.

Laszlo wrote:Adult 123 - Aged forty-two. Head of a research team who is close to curing all cancer.

the players in your fantasy have gone from generic people to nameless children and the man who is about to cure cancer.

kay wrote:As someone who doesn't really distinguish between genders, I could find the notion of "hot people first closely followed by people of societal worth" to be acceptable.

So you're in agreement that children go last. Nice

I suppose children could be hot or societally worthy too. But the first would be a good way to catch paedos and therefore root out the adults who are not of societal worth.

The idea that they are called firefighters and not watermen.

Also in a fire you shouldn't go by how hot they are, but how cold they are.
Survivability!!!!

kay wrote:I suppose children could be hot..

..if you've done the right thing and saved the cancer scientist!

nowaysj wrote:Time to retire the concept and activity of work.

Laz, fuck off - We've already experienced life, we've used it up. The little whipper snappers haven't, they deserve the chance more than we do.

I agree. Why do all these ideas have to be completely removed from what's in front of us and everyone deals with in their daily life?

Most people working at a similar time, why do most of us go to work from 9-5 (roughly), it fucks shit up, congestion etc

Apparently agricultural age UK people worked fuck all in comparison to modern people... or longer hours, but way less work and could fuck around.

The industrial age mentality still has a hold over society, yet barely anyone works in factories anymore. Schools designed to send people to a production line, rigidly defined working hours, the need to produce to consume etc.

The reason this isn't thought about is because economics apparently isn't a science (which is semi-reasonable considering it lacks falsifiability in a lot of it), but that a lot of people seem to consider the whole concept of what constitutes work a forgone conclusion and what we have now is everything that will ever be...

Laszlo wrote:Child xyz - Aged eight. Has not achieved anything and is statistically unlikely to have any major impact on the human race.

Adult 123 - Aged forty-two. Head of a research team who is close to curing all cancer. Has a wife and two children.

Which should be saved first?

The one made out of straw?

They burn the fastest.