I have written a number of times on agreement reality and today I was spurred again to write on that subject by asking~ What is science?
Science is only that which a group of people agree it is, right? Yep, pretty much. Now, lets look at it written in sophisticated lingo. Science is a systematic enterprise (exercise or pursuit) that builds
and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and
predictions (man made order of investigation based on what is supposed/ followed by prophecy or forecast) about the universe ~ Wiki
How do people arrive at agreement on anything (including 'what is science') when they come from diverse cultures, data bases, different geographical and racial experiences? Well, here is what 'Wiki' had to say ~ Scientific consensus is the collective judgment, position, and opinion of the community of scientists (people thinking highly of themselves as experts) in a particular field of study. Consensus implies general agreement, though not necessarily unanimity-agreement.
What is consensus? Well, consensus is achieved through communication at conferences (talking over coffee and snack bar i.e), the publication process (what a university deems profitable for their future), replication of reproducible results by others, (if you arrive at the same results, you can join the club) scholarly debate, and peer review.
These lead to a situation in which those within the discipline can
often recognize such a consensus where it exists; however, communicating
to outsiders (laypeople 'outsiders') that consensus has been reached can be difficult, because
the "normal" debates through which science progresses may appear to
outsiders (usually other 'science people' in other places... not aliens) as disputable.
On occasion, scientific institutes issue position statements (make a stand for what they agree on is true/right) intended
to communicate a summary of the science from the "inside" to the
"outside" of the scientific community (which props up their institution for future). In cases where there is little
controversy (disagreement) regarding the subject under study, establishing the
consensus can be quite straightforward (a cinch as in sure thing).
Political debate on subjects that are controversial
within the public sphere but not necessarily controversial within the
scientific community may invoke scientific consensus (invoke-beg/entreat): note such topics
as evolution, climate change, or the lack of a link between MMR vaccinations and autism.
So, what is science? Only that which man in his vain social imagination agrees on and gets others to agree on; thus, building up what is called a consensus or standard model for the truth and or reality.
*Most tech info above is from online sources including really great descriptions by Wikipedia of all places...
*And, for the record, what is an 'expert'? An expert is a 'made' resource person or pundit or authority (licensed by another authority of the same making) in a particular subject or field who is frequently called on to give opinions about it to the public. Also, I hope you noted...science progresses through debates. Through debate... mmm, talking to people until you get them to agree with you.
