4 ms·
Doesn't science also apply to science? We should be sciencing our science which means being skeptical of all conclusions, even your own. I feel your stress.
by megamindbrian 9y ago
Doesn't science also apply to science? We should be sciencing our science which means being skeptical of all conclusions, even your own. I feel your stress. I use to even call myself a scientist, and regard myself as a scientist, but then I realized 90% of my work is entirely unmeasured and there is no sense of effectiveness of the remaining 10% that actually makes it to production.
- jrochkind1 9y agoI think we need a lot more focus and funding on a field of study/discipline that studies how science it done. I'm not honestly sure who in the academy, if anyone, is doing this. "History of science" comes close (it's not always "in the past"), but generally scrupulously avoids making any determinations of the "validity" of the science, it tends to be like a _social_ study of how science it done, intentionally having no opinions on how to make it "better" or "worse". Are there any departments or disciplines or academic careers that can be made on scrupulous scientific study of how science goes right and wrong, including statistical as well as other issues? I think we need it.
- isolli 9y agoConsidering that scientists are reluctant to accept scientific evidence when it applies to them, I'd say no. https://www.wired.com/story/why-men-dont-believe-the-data-on-gender-bias-in-science/ https://www.wired.com/story/why-men-dont-believe-the-data-on...