Calling for Beta Readers

[swamidass (S. Joshua Swamidass)]

@Patrick

I offer to read and critique on the science only. And point out where you drift away from strict science neutrality. which is okay as long as it is identified as moving outside of science.

THANK YOU @Patrick. That would be very helpful. Few people understand the line I’m walking here, but I think you do. It would really serve me to make sure I don’t leave any fuzziness here. I’ll be in touch.

The Rules of the Game

Continuing the discussion from Who Sponsors Peaceful Science?: A fairly important distinction has been raised that I think is valuable. It seems that our resident atheist @Patrick and I both share a similar view of how operate, with disagreements in the public square on faith and science. I think this important to call out for several very practical reasons. First, I agree with the distinctions being made here. Clearly making these distinctions are part of what can help bring about Peaceful Science. The fact that our resident “militant” atheist and I (a openly confessing scientist) both agree on this should be a indicator that there should emphasize the value of this point. Second, making this clear is immensely important to students who are listening in. Not knowing the rules, it can just be frightening, not knowing what is allowed and not. Clearly laying out the rules, however, can give confidence about how we can talk about deeply held values, with calling down others who disag…