I think you're ignoring the point of the article. In science you generally only want to build upon something when you are certain, beyond any reasonable doubt,

I think you're ignoring the point of the article. In science you generally only want to build upon something when you are certain, beyond any reasonable doubt, that what you're assuming is correct. Otherwise it is, at best, a waste of time. At worst it's something that could severely mislead people and undermine your entire field. For instance first let's consider physics. I can explain to you the math of acceleration, gravity, friction, conservation of energy, or other basic aspects of nature. In 30 minutes you can setup an experiment and confirm for yourself with practically 100% accuracy that this is all correct. This, these sort of first principles, can be very safely built upon. But then as you build new ideas upon these first principles and then new ideas upon these new ideas, you run ever greater risk of fundamental mistake. And so going back to the original sources is critical to understand how they came to their conclusions and where the risks might be. Now let's consider psychology. Psychology itself lacks any real first principles. Different people, and sometimes even the same people, will act in different ways in the same scenario. At best it's a probabilistic science which introduces major and complex issues, when done perfectly. And it's not done perfectly. Outside of flawed logic, these sort of sciences also seem to attract unusually flawed scientists. For instance it's now completely clear that the Stanford Prison Experiment was literally fake. The students were coached on how to behave by the 'researcher', and saw the experiment as literally playing improv with one another. The 'mental breakdown' that caused the experiment to be cancelled after 6 days was fake. And we've now been teaching that experiment to kids for some 50 years, and ongoing. And it's not just older experiments of course. Recent research has shown that some 50-60% of major psychological studies in reputable journals cannot be replicated. You simply cannot build upon this in any meaningful way and to try to do so would turn the field into an even greater mockery of anything that purports to be science.