Janic wrote:SAM, the zetetist, tried to trap Klein by wanting to lead him into his delirium on sects and charlatans (well other sects and charlatans than his own) Klein who knows the character replied that all scientists were necessarily charlatans insofar as they only partially knew this science and therefore all their speeches were charlatanism, including his!This is certainly not the opinion of Etienne Klein who is a scientist.Christophe wrote: Aren't the worst ultracrepidarianists journalists now? How many have taught scientists lessons since the onset of the covid crisis? In particular with regard to Raoult!
And pan in the teeth of all those who recommend themselves to the term "scientific".
the problem is in "being", as if it were an "essential" characteristic to be right or wrong. While everything shows that all individuals are fallible, all great scientists have made mistakes, everyone has their dark side.
But you deduce that the scientific approach does not exist, that everything is equal, and that there is no difference between zetetics and obscurantism. You don't understand that rationality exists in the process and not in the person. You use authoritative arguments to say that such and such a person who has such and such a title or has spent so many years studying the problem is "therefore" necessarily right, when it is very possible to spend all your life saying whatever. Not having a clear awareness yourself of what a rational attitude is, you conclude that it does not exist, and you accuse others of your own faults.