this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2025
168 points (96.7% liked)

science

19489 readers
1267 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

No one is casting aspersions on the scientific method or the value of research, what is questionable in this case is that the conclusion simply follows naturally from the hypothesis. The proposition here is that people who have opposing political views are more likely to be antagonistic to each other, that is a tautology.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

And yet, you’ll see many people posting elsewhere on social media that it shouldn’t be relevant.

Can’t imagine trying to share a life with someone who didn’t share my values, but there seems to be a contingent that think that other things should be more important.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 19 hours ago

No one is casting aspersions on the scientific method or the value of research

In your original comment, it seemed like you were questioning why the study was funded, then compared it to another obvious cause-effect about kicking a dog. Did I misunderstand?

the conclusion simply follows naturally from the hypothesis

The conclusion might have confirmed your personal hypothesis, but we don't assume that any conclusion "naturally follows" a hypothesis without measuring it.

The proposition here is that people who have opposing political views are more likely to be antagonistic to each other, that is a tautology.

The way you phrased it is a tautology, but the study didn't measure antagonism. It measured whether couples broke up or not.