to be a science denier, would you? But it’s one food myth tumbling after another…
Look, I’m not saying that a high-fat, high-salt diet is ideal. I’m saying the we need to be a little scientifically minded, here. Instead, we have let political food police rule the day.
It’s not just food…
But we need to understand that this goes far beyond a single issue. This goes directly at Science itself. It strikes quite directly at the heart of Science’s truth-claims.
I mean, why is it that dietary “knowledge” changes every few years? Is there nothing sure? And if it changes, how is that real knowledge?
And this strikes at the heart of whether or not scientific knowledge is itself reliable. It certainly is one good way of knowing, but I don’t think logically it’s the only way. Every bit of scientific knowledge is filtered through a subjective human being.
Yes, I understand that these are deep waters, indeed. It strikes at the very core of all knowledge. I mean, if a certain method cannot guarantee truth, what can? In that case it has to be something other than something derived from sensory experience that produces real knowledge. Yet that kind of evidence is often derided as “subjective.” In that case, theory is primary and “data” are secondary. I think that is very clearly true.
In this case, the issue is not really what they data say, but what you are, and scientific studies are merely a platform for that. In short, truth is bound up in a way of being, and “facts’ are ultimately unreliable. Yet that is rationalism and pretty much discredited in the modern mind.