5 ms·

I'd like to know if you can give some evidence in the past (say) 20 years that science has discarded or delayed acceptance of a good theory because of 'social c

I'd like to know if you can give some evidence in the past (say) 20 years that science has discarded or delayed acceptance of a good theory because of 'social conformity'.

czbond 6y ago
I'm talking at the individual level - humans are socially pressured to conform to their field of study current beliefs (in any field). It takes long periods of time for ideas that go against the grain to bubble up to become 'mass conscious' within a field. Especially in areas requiring higher mathematics where practitioners can feel inferior.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  Which I'm saying I don't believe. Show me recent examples where it happened, I asked. > Especially in areas requiring higher mathematics I just don't recognise this at all. Why do you say this? The journals are full of new discoveries, my experience with mathematicians is they're a very open and accommodating bunch (ok, it's not my field, but still)
BadThink6655321 6y ago
See the <a href=“ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment”>Millikan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment”>Millika... Oil Drop Experiment</a>, particularly the section “ Millikan's experiment as an example of psychological effects in scientific methodology”
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  Interesting, I'll have a careful read of that but I must point out it was from 90 years ago, a bit outside my stated margin!
- saagarjha 6y ago
  Fixed link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment#Millikan's_experiment_as_an_example_of_psychological_effects_in_scientific_methodology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment#Millikan's...
  - BadThink6655321 6y ago
    Thanks!
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
rstupek 6y ago
I'm not sure if it meets your 20 year criteria, but science believed that peptic ulcers were the result of over production of stomach acid when one researcher proved that a bacteria was the cause of the majority of them. He had to buck general scientific consensus
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  My understanding was that he provided the strong evidence (by experimenting on himself), and things changed. If he'd provided the evidence then been told to take a running jump by everyone else, I'd say you have a point.
TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
Older: Wegener's theory of Continental Drift was dismissed for around four decades before it was reinvented by someone else and accepted by geologists. Recently: transgenerational epigenetics was considered a violation of the Central Dogma of biology, but since then evidence has piled up and it's now considered a legitimate area of research. The jury is out in high energy physics where SUSY and string theory elbowed some (possibly) more interesting competitors out of the way. It's too early to tell how that will work out - but it is clear that some approaches get a lot more funding and attention than others, and this seems to be for political rather than objectively scientific reasons.
inimino 6y ago
If you would think for a moment about the time scale over which these things develop ("one funeral at a time") you'd recognize how absurd a question this is.

I'd like to know if you can give some evidence in the past (say) 20 years that science has discarded or delayed acceptance of a good theory because of 'social conformity'.

czbond 6y ago

I'm talking at the individual level - humans are socially pressured to conform to their field of study current beliefs (in any field). It takes long periods of time for ideas that go against the grain to bubble up to become 'mass conscious' within a field. Especially in areas requiring higher mathematics where practitioners can feel inferior.

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
Which I'm saying I don't believe. Show me recent examples where it happened, I asked. > Especially in areas requiring higher mathematics I just don't recognise this at all. Why do you say this? The journals are full of new discoveries, my experience with mathematicians is they're a very open and accommodating bunch (ok, it's not my field, but still)

BadThink6655321 6y ago

See the <a href=“ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment”>Millikan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment”>Millika... Oil Drop Experiment</a>, particularly the section “ Millikan's experiment as an example of psychological effects in scientific methodology”

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
Interesting, I'll have a careful read of that but I must point out it was from 90 years ago, a bit outside my stated margin!
saagarjha 6y ago
Fixed link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment#Millikan's_experiment_as_an_example_of_psychological_effects_in_scientific_methodology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment#Millikan's...
- BadThink6655321 6y ago
  Thanks!
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

rstupek 6y ago

I'm not sure if it meets your 20 year criteria, but science believed that peptic ulcers were the result of over production of stomach acid when one researcher proved that a bacteria was the cause of the majority of them. He had to buck general scientific consensus

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
My understanding was that he provided the strong evidence (by experimenting on himself), and things changed. If he'd provided the evidence then been told to take a running jump by everyone else, I'd say you have a point.

TheOtherHobbes 6y ago

Older: Wegener's theory of Continental Drift was dismissed for around four decades before it was reinvented by someone else and accepted by geologists. Recently: transgenerational epigenetics was considered a violation of the Central Dogma of biology, but since then evidence has piled up and it's now considered a legitimate area of research. The jury is out in high energy physics where SUSY and string theory elbowed some (possibly) more interesting competitors out of the way. It's too early to tell how that will work out - but it is clear that some approaches get a lot more funding and attention than others, and this seems to be for political rather than objectively scientific reasons.

inimino 6y ago

If you would think for a moment about the time scale over which these things develop ("one funeral at a time") you'd recognize how absurd a question this is.