From a peak of around 300,000 Christians, the population was reduced to about 1% of Japan’s population today.
In modern society, a similar practice is at play through the “anti-science” narrative that seeks to prosecute people as heretics when they oppose what is deemed ‘science’.
I’ve published an investigative article that provides an example of a modern “anti-science” inquisition.
Philosophy professor Justin B. Biddle who studied the anti-science narrative, concluded the following:
The anti-science or war on science narrative has become popular among science journalists. While there is no question that some opponents of GMO are biased or ignorant of the relevant facts, the blanket tendency to characterize critics as anti-science or engaged in a war on science is both misguided and dangerous.
The anti-science narrative doesn’t merely involve an innocent ‘label’, which is evident from calls for prosecution.
For example, in 2021 the international science establishment called for anti-science to be combated as a security threat on par with terrorism and nuclear proliferation:
Antiscience has emerged as a dominant and highly lethal force, and one that threatens global security, as much as do terrorism and nuclear proliferation. We must mount a counteroffensive and build new infrastructure to combat antiscience, just as we have for these other more widely recognized and established threats.
First thought, I’m gonna watch that movie. (…nevermind.)
Second thought, when one faction of “science” labels other factions of science as anti-science, it reminds me of when some Democrats label Republicans as unpatriotic or undemocratic, and the vice versa, when they both suck equally for different reasons. I’m not sure if that is the case here.
…but I was exposed to how Monsanto basically destroyed whatever local industry they tried to take over with their seeds… with seemingly (presumably) good intentions (like ending world hunger, I guess?… not just turning a profit with a hostile takeover?).
It also reminds me of how Event 201 coordinated so well right before the global pandemic of magically disappearing-reappearing-flu paired with the common cold on steroids. And people who didn’t want to be guinea pigs for an experimental vaccine were labeled anti-science extremists (even if fully vaccinated before the pandemic), whereas everyone else who were on the Global public health bandwagon used fear tactics that were labeled evidence-based.
I think the term “anti-science” becomes dangerous the moment it stops being a descriptive criticism and becomes a social weapon. There are at least 3 different things people mean, and they get blurred together:
A straightforward epistemic complaint: someone is ignoring relevant evidence, misrepresenting a study, or refusing to update.
A disagreement about values and policy under uncertainty (risk tolerance, who bears costs, what counts as acceptable evidence).
A status move: “my side is Science, your side is Heresy” — where the label itself does the work.
On (2): critics can be fully “pro-science” while still pushing back on a rollout/technology because the core question is normative (how much epistemic risk is acceptable, and for whom). That’s why the Biddle-style point about values and epistemic risk is important: it’s not automatically irrational to object; sometimes the objection is to the decision rule or to who gets to decide.
On calls for prosecution: that’s where I’d draw a hard line. In liberal societies, the default should be more speech, better institutions (transparency, conflict-of-interest rules, open data where possible), and better science communication — not criminalizing dissent or turning “wrong” into “evil”.
If you want a clean philosophical target: maybe define “anti-science” as a pattern of epistemic vice (dishonesty, motivated reasoning, systematic misrepresentation), and *separately* treat policy disagreement as ordinary moral/political conflict.
Curious what you mean by “prosecution” here — legal penalties for fraud/defamation, or punishment for merely opposing a mainstream consensus?
It seems to me that the battle in science currently taking place is between positivism and tribalism (for lack of better terms). Maybe I’m wrong. I’ve been out of the pipeline for a long time but what I see lately from my perspective in my little corner of the world is a return to spirituality and metaphysics. Positivism seems mostly to be agnostic to me while tribalism seems to emphasize spiritualism. Positivism seems to me to emphasize randomness and uncertainty while tribalism emphasizes design and purpose or certainty. Again, maybe I’m wrong. It’s been a while for me since I was in college.
Probably has something to do with making them lose their jobs or quit their education because they won’t get the experimental vaccine, shaming them because they’re killing their grandmothers, even though it was the establishment that triaged their grandparents to death with “emergency use authorized” experimental vaccines and end of life drugs given to people on ventilators that were too harsh to recover from… because they were just following unlawful orders. Probably also has something to do with discrediting and silencing their expertise because it disagrees with the “global public narrative”.
Good clarification — what you’re describing sounds more like *coercion* (employment/education mandates, social shaming, deplatforming) than “prosecution” in the strict legal sense.
When I said I’d draw a hard line at prosecution, I meant: using criminal law (or quasi-legal punishment) against people primarily for dissenting from a scientific consensus.
That said, it’s still worth distinguishing:
penalties for *fraud/defamation* (knowingly making false claims about specific people/products)
public health policy choices under uncertainty (mandates, access rules)
informal social dynamics (shaming, blacklists, media narratives)
(2) and (3) can be ugly and unjust, but they’re not identical to (1) — and mixing them makes it harder to argue well.
If you want to criticize the “anti-science” framing, the strongest version (to me) is: it collapses policy/value disagreement into an epistemic/moral defect — and that can legitimize coercive institutions.
If labeling people child killing terrorists because they reject genetically modified or experimental anything… results in them being unable to feed their children (because you got them fired and became an obstacle in their path to leveling up… and they refuse to feed their children your globally monopolized experimental products…) who needs to prosecute? The job is done.
It’s got absolutely nothing at all to do with anti-science.
A starting philosophy dictates the direction a science takes.
We all know that mainstream science GUESSES that there are no moral absolutes.We all KNOW that it claims that there wasn’t moral absolutes at the start of it’s science.
We also KNOW …which means that we are NOT GUESSING that mainstream science was either initiated by magic or the starting philosophy for its science is incorrect. Either way we KNOW that all of mainstream science is fake.This isn’t anti science…this is REALITY!!!
You are totally incapable of thinking things through logically.
Of course cosmology and particle physics is ALL fake…Mainstream science has totally embarrassed itself by the claim that the cosmos is expanding only…when we all know that the cosmos and all the matter within it is expanding and contracting because its all VIBRATING!!!
Why does mainstream science make such ridiculous claims? It leaves itself wide open to ridicule.
There needs to be a radical shake up in science…We need to get rid of these psychotic cranks/crack pots and their religious agenda with it…they are totally blocking reality science.
The only science that makes any sense at all and works is computer and motor technology because its founded upon a full logic starting philosophy +/-=+/- and not a half logic starting philosophy.
We all know that cosmology and particle physics is founded upon a half logic starting philosophy of +=- and -=+ and omits of +=+ and -=- philosophy.
Nikola Tesla invented the motor!!! and he warned the world about Einstein’s fake theories but it wouldn’t listen…It’s listening now!!!
Of course it’s listening now…there is a massive switch back to spiritually especially among the young and its only going to increase further.They have had enough of BS misrepresentation of reality philosophy science and the psychotic cranks/crack pots who push it…they want to know about actual reality now.
Name names. How was Einstein an anti-spirituality crackpot? How was Tesla a pro-spirituality non-crackpot? How do you know in either case? How about the stuff you keep spouting? Quoting Bible verses which are relevant how? CERN conspiracy theories? C’mon now.
I’m more switched on about reality than you Ichthus…clearly. You’ve been asleep.,…come on …tune in a bit…and stop believing in half logic +=- and -=+ philosophy BS.
Einstein believed in HALF LOGIC!!! +=- and -=+ philosophy science that doesn’t work Ichthus!!! he even admitted that his theories didn’t work inside singularities.
Tesla believed in FULL LOGIC +/-=+/- philosophy science that does work Ichthus!!!
It’s you who believes that your science was initiated by magic Ichthus…lol…if it wasn’t then the starting philosophy (that you put so much foolish faith in is incorrect)…lol…It’s not me who’s under a spell I assure you. You can’t even reason things through properly. What is even more laughable is that you don’t even realize it because you are so totally unaware.You’re not a very good philosopher are you Ichthus.
I have told you many many times Ichthus but you clearly still have your fingers in your ears and doing the lalala’s.
I’ll repeat it again for you even if you don’t want to listen.
The claim of mainstream science that the attractive and repulsive electromagnetic force interactions NN;NS;SN;SS that we know exist between all spinning particles that make up all matter, cancel out, is incorrect. Therefore, the starting philosophy that we also know mainstream science adopts for it science which is +=- and -=+ which relates to force absolutes is also incorrect and therefore all of mainstream science that is founded upon this starting philosophy such cosmology and particle physics is all fake science invented to support a religious cult agenda which we know is totally aligned to Buddhism beliefs (and doesn’t even try to hide this fact) and even has a statue of the God that it believes in outside it’s HQ at CERN near GENEVA.
If you get rid of the real God …there will always be a fake GOD that will fill the void…ALWAYS.
Japan, which made me realize how serious inquisition is.