3 ms·
You don't need dishonest researchers to see this effect. You just need researchers who care, personally and/or professionally, about the impact of their work.
by kapitza 10y ago
You don't need dishonest researchers to see this effect. You just need researchers who care, personally and/or professionally, about the impact of their work.
I'm sure Mr. Spock is a professor somewhere. If you talk to real working scientists, you'll find very few Spocks. Also, there are not a lot of Victorian gentleman-scientists; they all need to be funded...
- cpncrunch 10y agoSure, but my point is that some scientists are more trustworthy than others, just like some newspapers are more trustworthy.
- monkmartinez 10y agoEh, the idea of "trust" gets into non-quantifiable territory very quickly. Further, your analogy with newspapers is, quite frankly, not good. I would say that generally speaking, if a newspaper consistently confirms one's biases it is more likely to be deemed "trustworthy" and vice-versa with "non-trustworthy" newspapers.
- cpncrunch 10y agoNo thats simply not true. Is a random personal blog as trustworthy as the globe and mail?