3 ms·

http://lesswrong.com/lw/im/hindsight_devalues_science/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/im/hindsight_devalues_science/

• frisco 16y ago
  I don't think this is hindsight bias though. As a scientist (not in biochemistry or astrobiology, though) I understand this had to be specifically shown, but this is one of those things that most people I talk to and I have always just casually treated as obvious. The confirmation is important scientifically, but shouldn't change our viewpoint, since it's what we've always expected. Am I wrong here? Any computational biologists or biochemists want to tell me this wasn't expected at all?
  • varjag 16y ago
    You can argue that possibility of alien life is also quite a common idea. Yet a confirmation of that would be considered a major scientific breakthrough.
    • frisco 16y ago
      Yes, I agree here. Slightly stronger because though the possibility of alien life is entertained, it's not necessarily the common viewpoint that its widespread and will eventually be found in droves (like I see non-carbon based life). On the other hand, I expect fully us to be looking back several hundred years from now wondering how we could have ever thought we were the along lifeform in the universe. But a major scientific accomplishment it will be when it's first discovered, for sure.