3 ms·

There is a realist argument and the argument that wins support. Realistically, most people won't touch scientific papers. You might get a few people who can wr

There is a realist argument and the argument that wins support. Realistically, most people won't touch scientific papers. You might get a few people who can wrangle up incredible things from them, but those people would have succeeded in any environment. Most research will continue to be done at major institutions like companies and universities. But that appeal to the heart is a winning argument, and it's not wrong. Open access in the end is a good thing, even if the arguments for it are stretched, and they are stretched. I don't trust a lot of my own colleagues to bulletproof their papers (get in a graduate course, you'll see how many holes are in most research), the general public with no scientific training is at best limited and at worst dangerous. It is a natural step, though. Your's won't be a popular question (do we really have to downvote the guy for asking a question, even if you don't like that question?), but it's a good one.

meri_dian 9y ago
Thanks for the understanding. I just wonder sometimes, if open everything is always good. I get that complete openness is part of the zeitgeist on this site and within the dominant liberal western social and political philosophy, but openness can sometimes lead to unintended negative consequences. I believe that specialists in a field are the ones who will actually make use papers. Specialists should have access, that's something I can get behind, but the general public as you say won't make use of research. I understand what you're saying about appealing to emotion though.
- gowld 9y ago
  Closedness usually leads to unintended negative consequences, as well-evidenced throughout history. Openness sometimes leads to unintended negative consequences.
gowld 9y ago
I'll never read my car's technical manual, but I'm damn glad my mechanic is legally permitted to. No stretch needed. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html

meri_dian 9y ago

Thanks for the understanding. I just wonder sometimes, if open everything is always good. I get that complete openness is part of the zeitgeist on this site and within the dominant liberal western social and political philosophy, but openness can sometimes lead to unintended negative consequences. I believe that specialists in a field are the ones who will actually make use papers. Specialists should have access, that's something I can get behind, but the general public as you say won't make use of research. I understand what you're saying about appealing to emotion though.

gowld 9y ago
Closedness usually leads to unintended negative consequences, as well-evidenced throughout history. Openness sometimes leads to unintended negative consequences.

gowld 9y ago

I'll never read my car's technical manual, but I'm damn glad my mechanic is legally permitted to. No stretch needed. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html