• Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    According to the chart, I’m a material Purist, but I’m very flexible on methodology.

    • marcos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      Came here to say the same…

      What is an interesting finding. I wonder how many people are in each camp. Maybe we can get some data by infighting in a pseudonymous forum.

      • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Need some more people to chime in, but I think the chart is flawed.

        Maybe I’m wrong, but I can’t imagine many people would consider Harry Potter a science, but physics is not.

        Seems more like a flexibility scale. “start in the top corner and see how far you can go until you think, no, that’s not science.”

        • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          I could see literary critique being a science, and good Sci-Fi takes fictional conceps and applies science to them, so Harry Potter Sci-Fi is possible (something like HPMOR perhaps).

          This types of chart are definitely a permissibility scale though, where each box is describing the most extreme position and would include all the less extreme positions to the top and left. I’m pretty sure it originated to describe positions in the sandwich debate.

          • OneMeaningManyNames@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            Indeed. I always read these charts like the more you go right/down you include the squares in your left and up side.

            No, saying that community activism is a science but physics is not is just absurd. You definitely progress until you draw the line.