(12-04-2013, 11:01 AM)rie Wrote: I would suggest to people who are critical of empirical evidence/research to also find the strength in this type of activity. That would create more balance than being just dismissive of the scientific process. The point of scientific process is to set a standard in how we understand a phenomenon or to demonstrate the validity and utility of theories on human behavior. Without this minimal standard we would not have a coherent way of understanding things. You will have people attributing psychological phenomenon as something purely physiological bc to them environmental factors are not significant at all. And maybe some would attribute drug use behavior as being a psychic attack or whatnot.
I think most people I've met in real life who are critical of evidence/research more because of a lack of trust of scientists due to past missteps rather than due to a rejection of the scientific process.
Btw, I am a great believer in taking an empirical/evidence based approach to life and it has yielded innumerable benefits for me personally. But that doesn't mean I'm going to automatically trust, believe, or rely on a given study published by Scientist A without doing my own research (see bit about psychs in my post above). In short, i think a lot of time its not as much about trusting a method as it is about trusting/not trusting a subset of experts (psychologists for me, perhaps drug company researchers for the next person).
That being said, I can see that there could be some new age type of thinking that rejects the scientific method completely. But on a more immediate level, the large amount of disregard of science that you see from even non spiritual people against vacinnes or global warming (or insert other hot button issue here) is a part of the issue of trust rather than a rejection of the sp. Just look at the comments on any news articles on these topics - you will see very few people who just reject the sp, and many people who reject the researchers and the researchers conclusion in that given case because of a lack of trust in those researchers themselves.