I am constantly fascinated at the religion of science and the ridged authoritarianism that comes with it from establishment ‘scientists’ and ‘researchers’.

While real science as a process of testing hypotheses clearly works and has greatly advanced humanity, there seems to be a fundamental disconnect from establishment ‘science’ as bureaucratic process that is self-reinforcing towards itself and its own authority, rather than science itself. To be clear, establishment science is not science at all, and corrupts the very idea of the scientific procedure through using authoritarianism, rather than proof of work to show why their science is actually correct.

This is why so many people today are willing (and mostly correct) in calling well understood scientific processes like vaccination a scam—because it is! It’s no longer real scientific vaccination, but has integrated profit motives of establishment ‘science’ that is more self-serving than scientific.

This is why doctors, scientists; and other ‘experts’ are indigent when it is suggested they are not beyond corruption and that perhaps the pharmaceutical companies or other corporations that sponsor their work could possible be manipulating the ‘science’ to be self-serving to make money. They cannot even think about or consider this because of the existentialism that is brought up from such thoughts.

Similar to The Church; doctors and scientists of the established system believe themselves (not the truth of science) to be the real purveyors of truth and health. They see themselves as being heros who have valiantly self-sacrificed to practice their religion or science as is the truth of the world. The very suggestion that perhaps they do not actually understand what ‘health’ or ‘science’ evokes the greatest of indignation as it suggest that maybe they are doing more harm than good, which results from them not being committed to the truth of the scientific process first and foremost; but the dark and callow truth that they are more concerned about how they will pay their bills and keep their job. Asking hard questions doesn’t do that, obeying blind however does.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

👏👏👏

Well put brother. A lot of it (probably) stems from that most people in "the science"™ didn't do any of the science themselves. It's a Trust Don't Verify system because it would be impractical to do so in most situations and they were taught to regurgitate the conclusions of the predecessors while aiming for increasingly narrow specialties. A return to polymath, cross-discplinary scientific work will do wonders for a better future, I think.

Much of what passes itself these days as the church is not the actual church. The church submits itself to the truth of the word of God, regardless the consequences. You know the words, they submit to reality and it’s laws. This is actually where modern science came from. It was the protestant Reformation and insistence on dealing with reality rather than Catholic superstitions that solidified modern science. Unfortunately, over the years enlightenment thinking corrupted both the church and science i to believing that “man” is in the center of everything rather than God. Substitute the word “truth” or logos for God if you must…

Here is something I wrote some time ago:

Traditional religion has been supplanted by a new belief system known as Scientism, where the government acts as the new church. This shift is not about the scientific method itself but rather about the faith placed in so-called experts. This prevailing belief system has become akin to the dominant religion of our time, with people so firmly believing in "the Science" that they fail to recognise it as a form of religion, instead accepting it as the absolute truth.

This faith in Scientism mirrors traditional religious belief in several ways. Both place an ultimate authority on truth and reality—science or a divine entity—and centre around a set of beliefs: Scientism in the infallibility of scientific methods and empirical evidence, and religious faith in the teachings and existence of a god or gods. Followers of Scientism, much like adherents of traditional religions, show devotion to their beliefs, which shapes their identity and community, providing a sense of belonging and a shared worldview.

A significant element of this new belief system is the reverence afforded to doctors, who are often viewed and trusted in a manner similar to priests in traditional religions. Just as priests are seen as intermediaries between the divine and the faithful, offering guidance, interpretation, and the administration of sacred rites, doctors within the church of Scientism are regarded as the mediators between "the Science" and the public. They interpret scientific findings, administer treatments (akin to sacraments), and guide individuals in making life choices based on the latest medical and scientific understanding. This trust in doctors underscores a profound faith in their knowledge and authority, positioning them as critical figures in the societal structure of Scientism.

Both the government, as the new church of Scientism, and traditional religious institutions employ remarkably similar methods of control and influence. They operate within structured hierarchies that demand respect and obedience. Legislation and dogma, education and indoctrination, the use of fear and rewards, and control over information are tools used by both to maintain power and uphold certain beliefs.

Moreover, ceremonies, rituals, symbols, and iconography reinforce loyalty and the values of these institutions, creating a strong sense of identity and belonging. The inclusion and exclusion criteria further define community boundaries, while both claim a form of moral authority that legitimises their rules and decisions.

Adding to this parallel, peer-reviewed studies have become synonymous with holy scriptures within the realm of Scientism. They are revered and quoted as the ultimate source of truth, guiding public policy and personal health decisions with an authority akin to that of sacred texts in religious traditions. Similarly, vaccinations can be seen as the Scientism counterpart to baptism in traditional religions, representing a rite of initiation and a symbolic induction into the community. These elements underscore the moral and communal dimensions of such practices within this belief system.

Crucially, questioning or criticising "the Science" that underpins Scientism elicits reactions reminiscent of those observed in traditional religious contexts. When the core tenets of Scientism are challenged, one can expect to encounter the same emotional outbursts that are typical of traditional religious disputes. This defensive stance highlights the role of authority in shaping collective beliefs and underscores how questioning the established "truth" becomes a fraught endeavour, often met with intense and emotional pushback. This dynamic not only reveals the emotional investment in Scientism but also the mechanisms by which it maintains its authority and cohesiveness, drawing a direct line to how traditional religions react to skepticism.

Thus, the resemblance between the control mechanisms of government as the church of Scientism and traditional religious churches is stark. It underscores how both types of institutions exert influence over individuals, often using a mix of psychological, social, and material means to achieve their ends. This expanded recognition prompts a reevaluation of our unwavering faith in "the Science" and invites us to question the similarities between traditional religious adherence and our contemporary belief systems, highlighting the complex interplay between belief, authority, and control in shaping human society.

Regardless of the efficacy of the rona-vax, I despise Fauci for his authoritarianism in the name of science.