SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the we-changed-the-rules,-we-can-change-them-back-again dept.
After nearly a decade in the wilderness of celestial classification, Pluto is on the rise again. In 2006, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) voted to adopt a new definition of what makes a body a planet, and to specifically demote Pluto to the status of dwarf planet. Now, with new data and images streaming in from New Horizons showing that Pluto is not only a little larger than previously thought, but also home to some remarkable geological features (including what may be some of the solar system's youngest mountain peaks, reaching to 11,000 ft/3,353 m high), many are saying it's time to restore the ninth planet to its previous station.
Perhaps not surprisingly, some of the most prominent advocates for Pluto are scientists working on the New Horizons mission, which reached the closest point of its long-awaited Pluto fly-by on July 14.
"We are free to call it a planet right now," Philip Metzger, a planetary scientist on the New Horizons mission, told DW.com. "Science is not decided by votes ... the planetary science community has never stopped calling bodies like Pluto 'planets'."
Really, isn't it time to re-classify Pluto as a dog?
Original Submission
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @09:38PM
So, an appeal to tradition [logicallyfallacious.com]. Now, are there any valid reasons, or just more sophistry?
(Score: 2) by theluggage on Wednesday July 22 2015, @12:51PM
So, an appeal to tradition. Now, are there any valid reasons, or just more sophistry?
Actually, it would be closer to Appeal to Consequences [logicallyfallacious.com] except for one pesky detail:
Appeal to Consequences: Concluding that an idea or proposition is true or false because the consequences of it being true or false are desirable or undesirable. (my emphasis)
That gets you coming and going:
First, the definition of a planet is a purely arbitrary choice - there's nothing true or false about it - whether its fundamentally wrong to call Pluto a planet is unfalsifiable [logicallyfallacious.com]. The IAU only decided on the definition by voting! Since we're not arguing about an issue of fact, issues of tradition and the consequences of change are perfectly valid evidence to weigh up.
Second - if pluto were a planet, then Eris and Ceres and who knows how many other Kuiper Belt objects would also count as planets. So what? Don't you like the consequences? Does it contradict with your traditional ideas of what a planet should be?
Now, are there any valid reasons
How about coming up with some valid reasons for your argument?
Actually, don't bother because there are now lots of things to discuss about Pluto that are far more interesting than what arbitrary label we pin on it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 22 2015, @06:33PM
My argument is that your argument that it should be called a planet has no validity. The valid reason for my argument is pointing out that your sole reason is an appeal to tradition. As you've stated, it doesn't matter what its called, so why are you so insistent that it should be called a planet?