I’m in New Zealand, climax to my antipodean speaking tour, where I walked headlong into a raging controversy. Jacinda Ardern’s government implemented a ludicrous policy, spawned by Chris Hipkins’s Ministry of Education before he became prime minister. Science classes are to be taught that Māori ‘Ways of Knowing’ (Mātauranga Māori) have equal standing with ‘western’ science. Not surprisingly, this adolescent virtue-signalling horrified New Zealand’s grown-up scientists and scholars. Seven of them wrote to the
The entire episode reflects on the dismal level of scientific understanding among politicians in many countries - the US especially included. Science is poorly taught in our schools, as a cathecism, a litany of assertions to be memorized, making it subject to being undifferentiated from cathecisms of other ilk. A basic grounding in science should focus on Karl Popper's "Science as Falsification", then built out with an understanding of the experimental method. This is something that even a politician could learn over a weekend.
It is also sad to see the process played out as a zero-sum game, in which the enfranchisement of one group necessitates the disenfranchisement of another. It need not be that way.
This is really too bad. Adern looked amazing on the global stage for a hot second, especially when world leaders were reeling during the pandemic, frozen, unable to do figure out a sensible course of action. Now, I'm not saying she didn't benefit from the size of her nation and its relative geographic isolation--NZ surely did--but I am saying that she was cool and (mostly) impressive at a time when almost nobody else was.
No matter the source or motivation, superstition has no place alongside science. None.
Well said. New Zealand is a total joke in all conceivable ways. Please, everyone stay away - the more our government realise how ridiculous we look in the eyes of the world the more likely things will change.
I am a retired academic that taught molecular virology at the Otago University, not only is Māori science being promoted but the University is changing its name and motif to be a Treaty compliant institution.
Dr. Dawkins perspective seems to be built upon the assumption that obtaining new knowledge should obviously be our goal, and thus whatever method of obtaining new knowledge is shown to be the most effective should be declared a "one true way".
Instead of just chanting his "one true way" dogma over and over again for years, it would be more interesting if Dr. Dawkins would inspect and challenge the assumption at the heart of his argument, that obtaining more knowledge is obviously the appropriate goal for humanity.
How much knowledge does Dr. Dawkins feel we can successfully manage? What powers should we have, and which should we not have? At what rate can society successfully absorb new knowledge and manage any social disruptions which may be caused by it?
Obtaining new knowledge is a desirable goal only if we can successfully manage the obtained knowledge and the power that flows from it. If we can't manage the knowledge being developed by science, then science is not a glorious "one true way" but a threat to the survival of the modern world.
Try this thought experiment if you will.
If I was walking around all day with a loaded gun in my mouth and was too bored by the gun to bother discussing it, would you do your best to hand me more power? Would doing that be rational?
This is who we are people. We have thousands of massive hydrogen bombs aimed down our own throats, and we're typically too bored by this ever present existential threat to the modern world to bother discussing it. This is the species whom the science community is determined to give ever more, ever larger powers, at what seems to be an ever accelerating rate.
To put it more simply....
1) The science community are NOT experts in the use of reason.
2) The science community can not be considered objective regarding questions such as how much science we should be doing.
3) When the science community start doing the "one true way" dance, we should refer to them as the "science clergy".
The God Delusion seems tame compared to the hydra-headed monster of multiculturalism. I enjoyed reading the God Delusion book when it was first written (and had the delightful opportunity of discussing it in person with Dr. Dawkins when he visited my city). However now we see that some delusions are more helpful than others, if indeed they are delusions. The God Hypothesis at least kept evil in check. Without the belief in a benevolent God our culture has become degenerate and depraved. Some people can live good lives without a moral compass, but others need some help along the way. A spiritual vacuum left by the absence of the Christian God has been filled by the malevolent monsters of a pagan past, and science has become a victim of that new religion.
Vaccines are one of humanity's greatest achievements, in my opinion, and I'm truly grateful for what science has brought us. But it wasn't "science" which eradicated smallpox. The discovery of the smallpox vaccine came from Jenner picking up an "old wive's tale" about dairy maids, trying it out on a sample size of one (an eight year old boy, who he presumably regarded as expendable if his old wive's tale turned out to be wrong) and then publishing the results himself because the Royal Society rejected his paper. If you are trying to make an argument against paying attention to indigenous knowledge, you've chosen a poor example.
(Science did play a great role in the eradication of smallpox, in creating better vaccines, in scaling up production etc, but it didn't do everything. It wasn't "science" who negotiated with people to accept vaccination, sometimes facing down armed men in the process. It wasn't science who occasionally resorted to coercion and sometimes forcible vaccination to achieve the goal.)
In the case of polio, it's a better example as it was science which developed the vaccines that we have today. But actually running an effective eradication plan, in countries where people have absolutely rational reasons for not trusting vaccines? That requires empathy. It requires the ability to step back from your own desire to be right and see the bigger picture. Things that aren't science.
“The true reason science is more than an origin myth is that it stands on evidence: massively documented evidence, double blind trials, peer review, quantitative predictions precisely verified in labs around the world.”
Given current conditions, do you still have faith in peer reviews?
"To grasp government intentions requires a little work, because every third word of the relevant documents is in Māori."
I am no fan of the current NZ government and virtue signaling, but what an arrogant, insensitive and possibly offensive comment to many Maori people in NZ. The English colonists deliberately almost erased the Maori language over a period of two to three generations. They punished Maori for speaking their language.
The government of NZ decided to make amends for this cultural holocaust in 1987, when the Maori language was declared the official language again in Aotearoa. So, it has nothing to do with current woke virtual signalling or white guilt.
It was an important gesture and a necessary step to bring the people of NZ together as one people. No country in the world I know of has managed race relations more successfully in the past 30 years than NZ.
I lived there during that time. I know how it was when I arrived in 1992- radical protests, mistrust and misunderstandings and a lot of resentment and grievances. Maori has a much bigger part in NZ culture, and many white NZ embrace and love Maori culture now. Tensions have eased significantly. And many young Maori, stigmatized and discriminated and angry in 1992, now hold their head up with pride and confidence. Part of that was the language program.
And yes, they integrate more and more Maori words into the mainstream. If you can't understand them, that is your problem, not theirs, and being condescending about it only reveals your intolerance and lack of sensitivity. But to be considerate and sensitive is probably not part of the scientific curriculum - hence the state of our world.
Once again, get your facts right, Mr. Dawkins, before you start typing. Do you think promoting and trying to resurrect the Maori language is wrong? And how long do you think it should take? Why do you think it took almost 35 years to get 186.000 people to speak Maori fluently again? Because all the way since 1987, NZ had insensitive, arrogant, racist rednecks like you fighting every step of the way against it.
The Māori just might be the ones who save humanity from the WHO and Globalist Fascist Oligarchy.
MAORI vs. PLANDEMIC
An international team of attorneys and scientists joined with the indigenous Maori people of New Zealand. They will start legal proceedings to bring those who are responsible for the covid plandemic to justice.
The justice system of the independent Maori people from New Zealand is ideal to start these lawsuits, because they are beyond the control of the western financial establishment. These western elitists have corrupted most of the worldwide judicial system to ensure they would never be held liable for
their crimes against humanity.
The upcoming legal proceedings will set a judicial precedent for the rest of the world as the evidence that will come to light can be used in any other court. Attorney Dr Reiner Fuellmich explains more in this interview with Stop World Control.….
The rot that transgenderism has wrought -- so to speak -- is pervasive, pernicious, and pathological. And nowhere more evident than in New Zealand's "Statistics Department's" prognostications on sex:
NZ Stats: “Sex reassignment occurs where a person has undergone the necessary treatment to permanently change their sex.
Science is science, things like pseudo-science, religion etc are not science because they are false. If something works and is true it will be adopted under the label of science to replace its original name if it was something before. There are aspects of science like chemistry or biology but they are not alternate science which there is no such thing.
Since the official and current curriculum for New Zealand schools stipulates that "Evolution" be taught under "Science" and "Maori Ways of Knowing" be taught under "Social Sciences", is it possible that the controversy on teaching both is a storm in a teacup?
Here's a little thought experiment which might shine some light on the science community's relationship with knowledge.
THOUGHT EXPERIMENT: What if some very clever scientist were to come up with a way to prove BEYOND ANY DOUBT that we are being visited by forms of higher intelligence? And what if this proven BEYOND ANY DOUBT discovery caused the public to look to these higher intelligence visitors for answers, instead of looking to the human science community?
Would the science community still be in favor of acquiring ever more knowledge as fast as possible if it was THEIR world that was disrupted by the acquired knowledge?
There’s only one “Way of Knowing”: Science.
Totally agree. I love creation myths and ancient rituals and traditions, but they have no place in the science classroom.
Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?”
The Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy.
The entire episode reflects on the dismal level of scientific understanding among politicians in many countries - the US especially included. Science is poorly taught in our schools, as a cathecism, a litany of assertions to be memorized, making it subject to being undifferentiated from cathecisms of other ilk. A basic grounding in science should focus on Karl Popper's "Science as Falsification", then built out with an understanding of the experimental method. This is something that even a politician could learn over a weekend.
It is also sad to see the process played out as a zero-sum game, in which the enfranchisement of one group necessitates the disenfranchisement of another. It need not be that way.
This is really too bad. Adern looked amazing on the global stage for a hot second, especially when world leaders were reeling during the pandemic, frozen, unable to do figure out a sensible course of action. Now, I'm not saying she didn't benefit from the size of her nation and its relative geographic isolation--NZ surely did--but I am saying that she was cool and (mostly) impressive at a time when almost nobody else was.
No matter the source or motivation, superstition has no place alongside science. None.
Well said. New Zealand is a total joke in all conceivable ways. Please, everyone stay away - the more our government realise how ridiculous we look in the eyes of the world the more likely things will change.
I am a retired academic that taught molecular virology at the Otago University, not only is Māori science being promoted but the University is changing its name and motif to be a Treaty compliant institution.
Dr. Dawkins perspective seems to be built upon the assumption that obtaining new knowledge should obviously be our goal, and thus whatever method of obtaining new knowledge is shown to be the most effective should be declared a "one true way".
Instead of just chanting his "one true way" dogma over and over again for years, it would be more interesting if Dr. Dawkins would inspect and challenge the assumption at the heart of his argument, that obtaining more knowledge is obviously the appropriate goal for humanity.
How much knowledge does Dr. Dawkins feel we can successfully manage? What powers should we have, and which should we not have? At what rate can society successfully absorb new knowledge and manage any social disruptions which may be caused by it?
Obtaining new knowledge is a desirable goal only if we can successfully manage the obtained knowledge and the power that flows from it. If we can't manage the knowledge being developed by science, then science is not a glorious "one true way" but a threat to the survival of the modern world.
Try this thought experiment if you will.
If I was walking around all day with a loaded gun in my mouth and was too bored by the gun to bother discussing it, would you do your best to hand me more power? Would doing that be rational?
This is who we are people. We have thousands of massive hydrogen bombs aimed down our own throats, and we're typically too bored by this ever present existential threat to the modern world to bother discussing it. This is the species whom the science community is determined to give ever more, ever larger powers, at what seems to be an ever accelerating rate.
To put it more simply....
1) The science community are NOT experts in the use of reason.
2) The science community can not be considered objective regarding questions such as how much science we should be doing.
3) When the science community start doing the "one true way" dance, we should refer to them as the "science clergy".
The God Delusion seems tame compared to the hydra-headed monster of multiculturalism. I enjoyed reading the God Delusion book when it was first written (and had the delightful opportunity of discussing it in person with Dr. Dawkins when he visited my city). However now we see that some delusions are more helpful than others, if indeed they are delusions. The God Hypothesis at least kept evil in check. Without the belief in a benevolent God our culture has become degenerate and depraved. Some people can live good lives without a moral compass, but others need some help along the way. A spiritual vacuum left by the absence of the Christian God has been filled by the malevolent monsters of a pagan past, and science has become a victim of that new religion.
Vaccines are one of humanity's greatest achievements, in my opinion, and I'm truly grateful for what science has brought us. But it wasn't "science" which eradicated smallpox. The discovery of the smallpox vaccine came from Jenner picking up an "old wive's tale" about dairy maids, trying it out on a sample size of one (an eight year old boy, who he presumably regarded as expendable if his old wive's tale turned out to be wrong) and then publishing the results himself because the Royal Society rejected his paper. If you are trying to make an argument against paying attention to indigenous knowledge, you've chosen a poor example.
(Science did play a great role in the eradication of smallpox, in creating better vaccines, in scaling up production etc, but it didn't do everything. It wasn't "science" who negotiated with people to accept vaccination, sometimes facing down armed men in the process. It wasn't science who occasionally resorted to coercion and sometimes forcible vaccination to achieve the goal.)
In the case of polio, it's a better example as it was science which developed the vaccines that we have today. But actually running an effective eradication plan, in countries where people have absolutely rational reasons for not trusting vaccines? That requires empathy. It requires the ability to step back from your own desire to be right and see the bigger picture. Things that aren't science.
“The true reason science is more than an origin myth is that it stands on evidence: massively documented evidence, double blind trials, peer review, quantitative predictions precisely verified in labs around the world.”
Given current conditions, do you still have faith in peer reviews?
"To grasp government intentions requires a little work, because every third word of the relevant documents is in Māori."
I am no fan of the current NZ government and virtue signaling, but what an arrogant, insensitive and possibly offensive comment to many Maori people in NZ. The English colonists deliberately almost erased the Maori language over a period of two to three generations. They punished Maori for speaking their language.
The government of NZ decided to make amends for this cultural holocaust in 1987, when the Maori language was declared the official language again in Aotearoa. So, it has nothing to do with current woke virtual signalling or white guilt.
It was an important gesture and a necessary step to bring the people of NZ together as one people. No country in the world I know of has managed race relations more successfully in the past 30 years than NZ.
I lived there during that time. I know how it was when I arrived in 1992- radical protests, mistrust and misunderstandings and a lot of resentment and grievances. Maori has a much bigger part in NZ culture, and many white NZ embrace and love Maori culture now. Tensions have eased significantly. And many young Maori, stigmatized and discriminated and angry in 1992, now hold their head up with pride and confidence. Part of that was the language program.
And yes, they integrate more and more Maori words into the mainstream. If you can't understand them, that is your problem, not theirs, and being condescending about it only reveals your intolerance and lack of sensitivity. But to be considerate and sensitive is probably not part of the scientific curriculum - hence the state of our world.
Once again, get your facts right, Mr. Dawkins, before you start typing. Do you think promoting and trying to resurrect the Maori language is wrong? And how long do you think it should take? Why do you think it took almost 35 years to get 186.000 people to speak Maori fluently again? Because all the way since 1987, NZ had insensitive, arrogant, racist rednecks like you fighting every step of the way against it.
The Māori just might be the ones who save humanity from the WHO and Globalist Fascist Oligarchy.
MAORI vs. PLANDEMIC
An international team of attorneys and scientists joined with the indigenous Maori people of New Zealand. They will start legal proceedings to bring those who are responsible for the covid plandemic to justice.
The justice system of the independent Maori people from New Zealand is ideal to start these lawsuits, because they are beyond the control of the western financial establishment. These western elitists have corrupted most of the worldwide judicial system to ensure they would never be held liable for
their crimes against humanity.
The upcoming legal proceedings will set a judicial precedent for the rest of the world as the evidence that will come to light can be used in any other court. Attorney Dr Reiner Fuellmich explains more in this interview with Stop World Control.….
https://stopworldcontrol.com/maori/
The rot that transgenderism has wrought -- so to speak -- is pervasive, pernicious, and pathological. And nowhere more evident than in New Zealand's "Statistics Department's" prognostications on sex:
NZ Stats: “Sex reassignment occurs where a person has undergone the necessary treatment to permanently change their sex.
https://aria.stats.govt.nz/aria/?_ga=2.135330993.1433053733.1593671441-939313310.1593671441#StandardView:uri=http://stats.govt.nz/cms/StatisticalStandard/FrytLv0KtGf6RhVY
Science is science, things like pseudo-science, religion etc are not science because they are false. If something works and is true it will be adopted under the label of science to replace its original name if it was something before. There are aspects of science like chemistry or biology but they are not alternate science which there is no such thing.
Since the official and current curriculum for New Zealand schools stipulates that "Evolution" be taught under "Science" and "Maori Ways of Knowing" be taught under "Social Sciences", is it possible that the controversy on teaching both is a storm in a teacup?
Here's a little thought experiment which might shine some light on the science community's relationship with knowledge.
THOUGHT EXPERIMENT: What if some very clever scientist were to come up with a way to prove BEYOND ANY DOUBT that we are being visited by forms of higher intelligence? And what if this proven BEYOND ANY DOUBT discovery caused the public to look to these higher intelligence visitors for answers, instead of looking to the human science community?
Would the science community still be in favor of acquiring ever more knowledge as fast as possible if it was THEIR world that was disrupted by the acquired knowledge?