= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
whose rallying cry was "Rationality! Reason! Objective reality!"
Not to disagree with your main point (I've seen cultishness even in mathematics, where we really do have objective reality), but aren't those cults whose banner is Rationality in a better position than those who aren't? They may be just as cultish on the inside, but they have publicly accepted a standard that makes then vulnerable to criticism they cannot just dismiss. Wouldn't that make them a bit more honest?
Same point: are we more honest at overcoming bias, because we have a type of discourse that leaves us vulnerable to arguments of bias in ways we can't ignore - or do we just become more skilled at rationalising?
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
No. Part of the definition of a cult is an unquestionable dogma, which runs counter to the core ideas of science. Building a cult around known science (even if you understand the principles well enough to avoid engaging in cargo cult science) is going to slow progress.
Consider replacing "core ideas of science" with "core ideas of society" and I'll wager that's closer to the commonly-used meaning of "cult".