Asklemmy

55051 readers

425 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 7 years ago

MODERATORS

What do you think about a political system fundamentally built around the scientific method with the primary goal of optimizing the HDI, GDPPP, and environmental impact? (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 2 weeks ago by Zephyr@sh.itjust.works to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

That is all policies and political structures are testable and tested to see their effect on those three (or other suggested) factors. If a policy doesn't reasonably work then it's simply not continually employed. I'm curious to see what factors others think ought to be used.

It seems most political systems now were built without science in mind and utilize it as an afterthought to help develop legitimacy for policies individuals want. Generally politics across countries seems deeply emotionally driven and not fact driven. That is people have a feeling that an idea is a good idea and then they cobble together whatever they can to support that point without any unified measure of good or better. Ideally it ought to be the other way around, fact or evidence informed policy generation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Sounds a bit like the Bible in that it's self referentially true. If there's a hypothesis, measurement, and test then that's science. If one takes that and adds other ideas onto it it's science plus some other ideas. So far I haven't seen anyone use Marxism-Leninism to discover new particles, new methods of computation, medical treatments, and so on.

You can have whatever ideas you want but ultimately there will be some outcome from them that's measurable, even faith (or lack thereof) has measurable outcomes in the psyche and physiology of an individual or even a populace.

You see even science is used to legitimize these ideas within your own comment. That is we know ultimately through the scientific method if something is valid. If something has no measurable effect on reality then it can be noted but it's not of much concern. Like for instance maybe on the tip of every match is ten thousand angels doing the moonwalk, if it has no effect on anything it's not awfully important.