Post of the week comes from Dissecting Behavior and it is the first part of a series on science. I’m really looking forward to the rest of the series and am surprised this article hasn’t hit the “Freshly Pressed” grid. The post is long but captivating and well worth the read.
Posts for this feature are selected each week and posted on Friday, Saturday or Sunday. Posts selected are not necessarily featured the week they were originally posted.
One of the most common words in today’s dog industry is the word “science”: such as science-based, scientifically proven, or backed by science. Problematically, the word is often utilized in an attempt to punctuate that an idea, product, method, or concept is simply fact, and that anyone who disagrees with it is likely ignorant, uneducated, or just plain wrong. Sure, arguments and debates are essential to science, and in order for those to happen we have to have strong opinions. However, there are a growing number of people who have started resorting to the word “science” without knowing the methods or conclusions that constitutes the evidence behind their claims and with the extra assumption that science only has a singular opinion beyond reproach. The problem is that this isn’t really what science is about, nor is it how we got to where we are today.
View original post 2,039 more words