>"Science would benefit tremendously if this was the approach." This is just the original idea behind science as developed in the renaissance. The resistance t

>"Science would benefit tremendously if this was the approach." This is just the original idea behind science as developed in the renaissance. The resistance to checking each others work is a recent phenomenon. Edit to add a source: > "the foundation of scientific societies compelled scientists to change the way in which experiments were presented so that not only members of the scientific community but also the inexperienced reader would be able to repeat them by following the same steps. [...] Robert Boyle also played an important role in the evolution of scientific writing (Gotti,1996, 2001; Hunter, 2007). Fulton (1932: 78) has highlighted the contribution of the scientist, describing Boyle’s undertaking “to establish science as an integral part of the intellectual life of ordinary men”. He encouraged scientists to write in a language that their contemporaries could understand, and he undoubtedly did more than anyone of his time to make scientific methodology part of the intellectual equipment of educated men. [...] According to Gotti, one of the features of experimental essays is brevity, but this brevity of form does not imply brevity in the exposition of the subject. On the contrary, experiments are usually reported in full, furnishing the reader with all the minutest details. The aim of such a report is, after all, to make it possible for the experiment to be repeated, making the precision of the description an important factor." https://doi.org/10.14198/raei.2007.20.06 https://doi.org/10.14198/raei.2007.20.06