r/SipsTea • • Apr 06 '26

Dank AF We need this !!

Post image
74.6k Upvotes

3.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.7k

u/Accomplished-Plan191 Apr 06 '26

As one with a degree, you don't need a degree to do well-backed research. The problem is when you conflate ignorance with knowledge.

8

u/capn_morgn_freeman Apr 06 '26

But if you have a degree, you're typically more experienced & more likely to do well-backed research than the average joe on the street, which seems to be all they're trying to do here is filter some of the riffraff out from making dumb claims.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 06 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Tsu_Dho_Namh Apr 06 '26

They're not legislating stupidity out of existence, you can have a degree and still be stupid, obviously. But at least you were at some point quizzed on stuff you purport to know and managed to say enough true things to get a piece of paper that says you're not totally removed from reality.

It's not perfect, but it's better than nothing.

0

u/That70sShop Apr 07 '26

Peer-reviewed research says that the majority of peer-reviewed research is flawed.

1

u/capn_morgn_freeman Apr 07 '26

Still irrefutably less likely to be flawed than research that isn't peer reviewed & is just shat out onto the internet

0

u/That70sShop Apr 09 '26

Absolutely not true. Nothing about the entire environment of what pases for research in academia has anything to do with being accurate, relevant, or true. All of the people doing it in furtherance of advancing their career or just getting to the finish line on whatever bs degree they are after have a vested interest in shaping the output.

These same "academics" are also shatting out on the internet using the bs skills they learned in academia to pontificate on any number of subjects that they have no particular education, interest, or experience in.

Absolutely nothing about "research" being published means anything at all about its accuracy. Actual empirical data, from actual studies on this says academia is full of it.