3 ms·
I don't think you understood what I took issue with in your post. You said: > Passing peer review is something used as a substitute for reproducibility And w
by rantanplan 8y ago
I don't think you understood what I took issue with in your post.
You said:
> Passing peer review is something used as a substitute for reproducibility
And what I'm saying is "No, it's not". Reproducibility of the results is the most important aspect of the scientific method, otherwise, as I said above: "what's the point really? We would resort to trust or belief in one's sayings."
- nonbel 8y agoOh. I never said that was a good thing. Institutionalized peer review as its done today is a relatively new thing, introduced post-WWII. Ie, that statement was descriptive, not normative. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/peer-review-not-old-you-might-think https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/peer-review-no...
- rantanplan 8y agoOK, thanks for clarifying, I obviously misread your comment.