Perhaps
the most defining characteristic of a true scientist is a willingness
to suspend disbelief and remain open to new discovery, even if it
means challenging the existing order of things, alienating
colleagues, or even opening oneself up to censure and professional
ruin. The greatest discoverers have always been scientific heretics
of one sort or another.
Unfortunately,
to be a revolutionary in science today is to flirt with professional
suicide. Much of most every field of study purports to encourage
experimental freedom, but... the entire structure of modern
scientific undertaking, with its highly competitive grant system and
publishing and peer review system, depends upon researchers
conforming to the accepted scientific worldview. The system as it
exists tends to encourage individuals to carry out experimentation
whose purpose is first and foremost to confirm the existing
consensual view of things, or to further develop technology for
industry, rather than to generate true innovation.
One
must always keep this in mind when the words “scientific consensus”
are used to support any issue or measure in the public domain. The
climate conversation comes to mind. As with the evolution of every
established social institution, eventually self-preservation of the
institution rises above public benefit.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.