Hacker News Reader

What did I just read? Some unheard of psychologist distorted and dumbified a perfectly understandable passage from the famous Pascal. And because he, as a psychologist, did that; the statement is now considered truth and valid "for realz". Am I getting this right?

Scientist are really our times high priests.

View on HN

I think it resonates because we've all seen both methods in action, and the proposed one (at least for me) has always lead to a better outcome.

The psychologist has also most likely seen even more examples in all the literature he has read and so can add a bit more weight to the argument.

What would convince you of the hypothesis? A quantitative study?

I think you misunderstood me 180 degrees. I was not advocating stronger evidence. I was questioning our culture need for "Now scientist have finally proven the old x is correct/incorrect".

Wasn't Pascal beautiful passages already obvious true before this psychologist made his statement?

But lots of things seem obviously true but turn out to be wrong or problematic. It is nice to get more than one opinion.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com