# What difference would it make if Scientific methodology, reason, and rationality ruled the world? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 3, 2013, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263 "2013-10-03T13:50:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/101 "2013-10-04T01:54:07Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Why is increasing or decreasing the well being of a conscious creature necessary? I don’t know that it’s necessary, just desirable. > [@](#): > > Maybe it is, or maybe it isn’t, but whether or not a logical society would choose to expend it’s resources on it would break down to maximum benefit verse those costs. Perhaps we would make the vaccine but it would only be available to some. Perhaps instead of a vaccine mandatory prophylactics would be used…or perhaps it would simply be better to prevent high risk sex. Perhaps we would make it and it would be available to all, but something else wouldn’t be that is today. We might stop research and development on diseases that only affect a few, and maybe diseases with genetic markers would warrant sterilization or even euthanasia to prevent them. Right, and science, reason and rationality would be a good tool to help you work all that out. Or do you disagree? > [@](#): > > Sure, but it might not be logical for society to PAY for it (like, in a music program). Of course. How are you going to decide? Flip a coin? > [@](#): > > Sure, someone might, and maybe music would be a program well supported, but something else would then not be. That’s the thing…you’d have to take the good with the bad, and the decisions wouldn’t be based on what you LIKE, but on what the unemotional and logical leaders determine we should HAVE. Why do you think logical leaders would discount emotion if science were to show that emotional cultivation led to improved well being? > [@](#): > > WE wouldn’t, since WE are the ‘feelies’…the public that makes decisions and our desires felt through feeling. That’s the whole premise of the OP, that we’d be run by pure logic and science, disconnected with feelings and emotion. The OP says you are misunderstanding him. > [@](#): > > Cost to benefit ratios and all that. I’ve dealt with scientist types enough to know exactly how it would work out with them in charge. Did you watch the video I linked in post 48? The guy has a Ph.D in cognitive neuroscience. Any problems with it? > [@](#): > > Which is why on most of the programs I’ve been involved in, the scientists AREN’T in charge, and there are administrators, because frankly, scientists suck at running things IMHO. Now, ENGINEERS… OK, so it might not be rational to have scientist run everything. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/102 "2013-10-04T01:59:36Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Then I’ll bow out, as to me it seems like selective bias. We want science and logic unless we want emotion, then it’s ok…or something. To me, that’s just a circle jerk of folks who want it both ways, as long as both ways are THEIR way, because obviously their way is the right way, etc etc. Sorry for the strawman hijack. Can you give your preferred methodology if you don’t like science, reason and rationality? Prayer? Chance? Might? Apathy? Indecision? FWIW, I think well being is best increased by letting as many people choose “their way” as possible so long as it’s not ruining someone else’s way. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/103 "2013-10-04T02:05:02Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > That’s my point. I’m not justifying them. I’m saying that they started with assumptions and then built up their society around them. Of course, but those assumptions were not “methodology, reason and rationality”, and we would say also not “ethical”. Fact is, I would wager they too fully understood that their systems weren’t ethical stricto sensu, which is why they turned themselves into pretzels trying to justify them rationally and, mostly, failed abysmally. On the other hand, we \*can \*prove scientifically that a king and a cack-handed peasant are both able to e.g. feel pleasure and pain to the same degree, require roughly the same amount of bread per diem and so forth. Same about a white man vs. a black man. And on that basis, there is rational ground to say “let’s chillax and hold out on the systemic buttfucking of the ones for the benefit of the others, yeah ?”. That doesn’t require much emotional investment that I can see. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/104 "2013-10-04T02:16:18Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Can you give your preferred methodology if you don’t like science, reason and rationality? Prayer? Chance? Might? Apathy? Indecision? The discussion seems pointless to me, which is why I was bowing out, but I’ll answer this one. My preferred methodology is what so obviously works best…that is, democracy where people are free to choose based on science, logic, reason and sometimes emotion. IOW, it’s not a construct, but instead is organic to human nature which incorporates all of these things. > [@](#): > > FWIW, I think well being is best increased by letting as many people choose “their way” as possible so long as it’s not ruining someone else’s way. Your assumption is that well being is a goal that everyone agrees on and is rational, and logical and innate. I disagree that everyone believes this, and I disagree that someone basing things without emotion and solely on logic and reason would necessarily agree that well being is something that needs to be maintained and nurtured. Since the OP says that this discussion isn’t about being emotionless and that ‘feelies’ doesn’t mean what it seems obvious to me it meant, then I really have nothing further to contribute to the discussion, since it’s apparent that I don’t get what this discussion is even about. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/105 "2013-10-04T03:04:41Z")
> [@XT](#): > > The discussion seems pointless to me, which is why I was bowing out, but I’ll answer this one. My preferred methodology is what so obviously works best…that is, democracy where people are free to choose based on science, logic, reason and sometimes emotion. IOW, it’s not a construct, but instead is organic to human nature which incorporates all of these things. Sounds like you agree more than disagree with the rest of us. > [@](#): > > Your assumption is that well being is a goal that everyone agrees on and is rational, and logical and innate. I don’t know if I would say “everyone” agrees, but pretty much everyone does, and I think it unfair to characterize that as a mere assumption. I’ve yet to meet a person who does not want well being. If any do come forth we could give their opinions rational consideration based on any logic, science or emotion they might present, though that might not be much consideration. > [@](#): > > I disagree that everyone believes this, and I disagree that someone basing things without emotion and solely on logic and reason would necessarily agree that well being is something that needs to be maintained and nurtured. Could you provide some examples of logical people who don’t value well being? > [@](#): > > Since the OP says that this discussion isn’t about being emotionless and that ‘feelies’ doesn’t mean what it seems obvious to me it meant, then I really have nothing further to contribute to the discussion, since it’s apparent that I don’t get what this discussion is even about. I think it’s about reason, science and secular morals, and how it would compare to religious type morals based on obedience and fiat. ---
**Author:** ![Steken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e274bd/32.png) [@Steken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steken)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/106 "2013-10-04T13:40:18Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > I’ve yet to meet a person who does not want well being. Though it is a common, popular opinion that “well being is da bomb,” I don’t see how it is particularly _scientific_. Science itself doesn’t do value judgments, does it? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/107 "2013-10-04T13:46:03Z")
Well, simple math tells me that the fewer people there are to divide up finite resources, the more of those resources I get. I just have to make sure that My Tribe is the one with the best weapons. As an American and a Westerner, I’m feeling pretty good about that right now… ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/108 "2013-10-04T13:56:38Z")
> [@Steken](#): > > Though it is a common, popular opinion that “well being is da bomb,” I don’t see how it is particularly _scientific_. What part of reasonable and rational from the OP are you failing to understand? I would be happy to hear you make a case for a better goal, reasonably and rationally. You can do that right here and now. > [@](#): > > Science itself doesn’t do value judgments, does it? Value judgements should be based on facts. Science helps us determine those facts. So science certainly assists with value judgements. Or do you disagree? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/109 "2013-10-04T14:01:04Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Well, simple math tells me that the fewer people there are to divide up finite resources, the more of those resources I get. I just have to make sure that My Tribe is the one with the best weapons. As an American and a Westerner, I’m feeling pretty good about that right now… What’s your guiding principle John? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/110 "2013-10-04T14:15:24Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Well, simple math tells me that the fewer people there are to divide up finite resources, the more of those resources I get. I just have to make sure that My Tribe is the one with the best weapons. As an American and a Westerner, I’m feeling pretty good about that right now… Your logic tells you that a smaller tribe is better for survival than a larger tribe? Why did your logic tell you to stay with the tribe in the first place? ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/111 "2013-10-04T14:20:18Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Your logic tells you that a smaller tribe is better for survival than a larger tribe? Why did your logic tell you to stay with the tribe in the first place? Well, we’re all cool but I’m not putting up with those damned Belgians anymore. ---
**Author:** ![Farin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e79b87/32.png) [@Farin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farin)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/112 "2013-10-04T14:28:55Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Well, simple math tells me that the fewer people there are to divide up finite resources, the more of those resources I get. I just have to make sure that My Tribe is the one with the best weapons. As an American and a Westerner, I’m feeling pretty good about that right now… Like this statement alludes, it depends on the degree that reason and rationality were embraced. Is it above all else? Is it only guidance coupled to the human condition? For instance, it’s reasonable and rational to stop sickle cell anemia by killing everyone that is a carrier at birth. Just as it’s reasonable and rational to kill everyone who doesn’t have a genetic resistance to HIV at birth. But how far could we take this reasoning? What if in 550 years (50 years after this all becomes standard operating fare per the OP) we found out (through properly scientific papers and study, not just some Internet 6.0 Meme) that those of Han Chinese descent were carriers of a genetic disease that caused Alzheimer’s in non-carriers. Wouldn’t it be reasonable to kill all non-carriers on earth to prevent the disease from spreading? (The Han are one of the numerically dominant ethnicities on earth, so it wouldn’t make sense to genocide that ethnic group versus all the others) Genocide, therefore, would be reasonable and rational. But most people, in my opinion, worth their salt today would consider this terrible or even monstrous. So if the leaders were guided by reason and rationality, would you, as a non-Han, consider this course acceptable? Would you revolt for self-preservation? It’s not rational, but it would be standard for humanity. Or would you line up for the [suicide booth](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_booth#Futurama)? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/113 "2013-10-04T14:53:04Z")
I’m just playing by the rules set up in the OP: _So the debate, How would the world be different if we woke up one fine century to discover that our leaders and governments are run on rational, science based ideals with careful thought towards logical governing instead of government by “the Feelies”_ I said in my first post that such leaders would be voted out very quickly, and I’ve been posting reasons why since. I’m guessing the OP thought he had a no-brainer, but it just ain’t so. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/114 "2013-10-04T14:55:39Z")
> [@Cyros](#): > > Well, we’re all cool but I’m not putting up with those damned Belgians anymore. Apply logic and reason before making such a decision, please: _Belgian chocolates!_ ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/115 "2013-10-04T15:00:12Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Apply logic and reason before making such a decision, please: _Belgian chocolates!_ And by removing a source of caloric overload I’ve saved our population from the evils of obesity (and I don’t really like chocolate…)! The logic works, man! ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/116 "2013-10-04T15:05:54Z")
> [@Cyros](#): > > And by removing a source of caloric overload I’ve saved our population from the evils of obesity (and I don’t really like chocolate…)! The logic works, man! But you’ve narrowed your focus too much. Quality of life is just as important as quantity, and why kind of quality are you going to have without Belgian chocolates? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/117 "2013-10-04T15:07:20Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I’m just playing by the rules set up in the OP: > > _So the debate, How would the world be different if we woke up one fine century to discover that our leaders and governments are run on rational, science based ideals with careful thought towards logical governing instead of government by “the Feelies”_ > > I said in my first post that such leaders would be voted out very quickly… Voted out and replaced by what? ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/118 "2013-10-04T15:19:21Z")
> [@Farin](#): > > Like this statement alludes, it depends on the degree that reason and rationality were embraced. Is it above all else? Is it only guidance coupled to the human condition? I’ve noticed that in this thread. People seem to be taking the ‘rational’ thing to a ridiculous extreme. There are many different things that need to be considered in an issue, not just the end goal. > [@](#): > > For instance, it’s reasonable and rational to stop sickle cell anemia by killing everyone that is a carrier at birth. Just as it’s reasonable and rational to kill everyone who doesn’t have a genetic resistance to HIV at birth. Er, no. These solutions might be rational on a certain very extreme level, but they are not reasonable. I took the OPs meaning not to be ‘What would happen if we were all Turing machines’, but ‘What would happen if reason and logic was the dominant force in government & politics instead of bullshit and yelling like it is now’. In my view it means not politicizing issues like global warming and instead evaluating them on their scientific merits and acting accordingly. It means that creationism would have been laughed out of court long ago. It means leaders not standing up in front of their constituents not knowing a damn thing about what they’re talking about and not spending most of the time lying through teeth. It also means leaders making decisions based more on reason and logic and what would actually be better for people and less on religious views and personal biases and what would be better for their wallet. But I do think John Mace is basically right. Without a similar change in everyone else this simply wouldn’t work. ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/119 "2013-10-04T15:20:55Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Voted out and replaced by what? People who pandered to the voters’ personal biases & beliefs, the way it’s done now. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2013, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263/120 "2013-10-04T15:23:11Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Perhaps I should have been clearer. > > Why is “minimizing human suffering” what science tells us our morality should be based on? Self-protection. Pretty much everything you do consciously is selfish, and wanting to minimize your suffering while maximizing your happiness [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-difference-would-it-make-if-scientific-methodology-reason-and-rationality-ruled-the-world/670263.md?page=7)