Roko asks a few reasonable questions but they have an embedded assumption - that the system has a goal other than propagating the system or even more accurately - boosting the spiritual worth of people running the system.

Let's explore a related field - pandemic prevention.
You're a federal bureaucrat and you've climbed your way to the top in a highly competitive environment.

How did you do that? Well, there was a key moment when you were a highly placed bureaucrat and the system needed the backing of The Science to throw up a smokescreen.
The moment of crisis was that the last great progressive victory of gay liberation seemed to have, well, created a massive deadly plague (oops).

Now this is very bad for the system - that's not at all what people who can promote you want to hear.

They want to hear *nice* things
So what do you do?

Well, you come up with a story that lets them hear nice things - "Hey, this plague can infect *anyone*, it certainly wasn't a massive downside to a feel-good progressive moment".

Congratulations, you were there when needed and have a long career ahead of you.
So now you're a mostly anonymous bureaucrat as far as the world is concerned but you're *important* in a small sphere - the people that *matter* (those looking for grants) know you and they have to kiss the ring.

You go before congress once in a while (you're important)
What do you do there? Well, you explain your budget to the representatives of the yokels.

You explain that your department needs every dollar it gets - why?

Because your grants are for *research* that *prevents pandemics*.

Can you believe these people?
You feel important, you are in charge of other *important*, *serious* people - people who *matter*.

People like the mover and shaker you give grant money to who runs an entire international team of researchers all of whom work on *important* matters.
Did you know that bats (due to having low body temperatures and living close together) are incubators for all kinds of viruses?

Well this guy did - because he's - well, not a Real Scientist - but someone even More Important - he has a *team* of Real Scientists.
The people working for him, well, they're humble sorts.

Just interested in *doing the research* - unsung heroes who do the grunt work.

It may not be much but everyone knows they Do Good.

Heck, she even gets a nickname.

Do you have one? Or are you just a guy in an office?
This is what Science is.

Now, how well does this machine produce the results that the higher ups haughtily deigned to explain to the proxy for the yokels? Does it "prevent pandemics"?


There's your answer about obesity research.
At every level the system is optimized for making everyone in the system feel good and important.

Now, all the people with the right opinions *know* what good diet advice is - you know it too, don't you?

"Eat more *plants*, don't eat bad foods that low status people like"
When the system is giving grants for research, what gets funded?

Studies that *prove* what everyone *who matters* already knows about diet.

Is some researcher going to make enemies *with the people who give grants* by showing their cherished beliefs are wrong?
So what do you get?

You get research the quality and type that comes out of nutrition science - you can read the details about how the studies are so bad elsewhere (@Mangan150) but it's no accident.

The research is set up in such a way that it can confirm the Right Opinions.
@Mangan150 Each field has its own failure modes but fundamentally science is all broken because it's not operating as a search for truth and it never could - it operates as a way to boost the status of the people involved.

*This doesn't mean science is impossible* but...
@Mangan150 it does mean that science is impossible when what boosts the status of the people involved is tied up in a bureaucratic culture of grant giving.

The Royal Society model had different way of distributing status and so produced better *men* who produced better results.


• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Covfefe Anon

Covfefe Anon Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @CovfefeAnon

4 Oct
Excellent thread.

Disagree that corruption at the top is the cause rather than being another effect.

The cause is that USG is run by a leftist egregore that has no goals other than "more power" and that Clausewitz was right - "war is the continuation of policy by other means"
If war is a continuation of policy and our government doesn't actually have any policies other than "no accountability for insiders" and "more power to insiders" then what can a military actually accomplish?


Did we invade Iraq using Anne Coulter's strategy? Nope.
Say what you will about Anne's proposal but at least it had a specific goal

In Afghanistan, what would a "success" of "women's rights" look like? There is no such state ... because even if it reached the state of the US - that's still not a place where "sexism is a real problem"
Read 5 tweets
23 Sep
Remind me again, are rationalists opposed to divorce?

How about parenting in "polycules"?
"Fathers chasing tail futilely while mom gets railed by a dozen men is fine for children to be around, but seeing your dad with another woman after your mother's long expected death? That's scarring and wrong!"
Read 4 tweets
18 Sep
This was an intentional lie by Scott to cover up why his tribe always falls for hoaxes.

It's not some neutral principle, its a facet of the left - you demonstrate loyalty by believing a big lie - hence why his post failed totally to give examples of anything similar on the right
This is not to say that the right is a truth machine but it fails in a very different way - it fails out of failing to understand the nature of the left - it often claims a motive of *financial* corruption when there's none there.
To a leftist money is meaningless because when you have power you can simply take money from those without power.

Every NGO lawsuit that extracts millions from some corp is the left transmuting power to money.

Rightists live in a world where money is earned on the market.
Read 4 tweets
13 Sep
The rarely seen reverse slippery slope argument

"you agreed to all these intermediate steps, why object now?"
The actual answer is that this is a valid measure for a sane, responsible government and it would get compliance - but what we have is an insane malicious government.

You can't import hundreds of thousands of Afghans *and* believe the next measure isn't done out of malice too.
You don't get to have your government run by people who gloat about how angry this measure makes people - revealing that their real motive is the anger - and also have people not notice.
Read 4 tweets
23 Aug
It's hilarious hearing people talk about "rescuing" women from Afghanistan when the place is revealed preference female paradise.

The men fight to the death leaving only winners who marry women and produce lots of kids. As a bonus they clamp down on ♀️ intrasexual competition.
Do these women worry about "society's expectations about appearance" or that b next door trying to catch her man's eye? Image
Women in Afghanistan be like

Western women be like

Read 4 tweets
1 Aug
Great thread (as always) by 17c here but I disagree with this assertion.

The "problem" with evolution is that it has the ability to get trapped at local maxima - as long as a solution is good enough, it suffices.

Progressivism is strengthened by evolved adaptations to it.
Look at criminal justice as an ex.

Initial state - cops on beats have personal executive authority

Progressive attack - only priestly judicial authority can legitimize punishment

Evolved solution - cops can that authority only on a "suspect" who "flees" or "resists"
This evolved solution works for a while but the progressives start getting itchy - there's power out there and people unwilling to defend it.

Video cameras in private hands mean *every* incident can be reviewed by priests - the adaptation fails.
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!