There is a ton of current and past scholarship on the sociology, history, and philosophy of science, and peer-review and publication is actually a pretty hot to

There is a ton of current and past scholarship on the sociology, history, and philosophy of science, and peer-review and publication is actually a pretty hot topic in those fields. Although yes, perhaps it would be nice if that work was better funded, or if practicing scientists paid more attention to it rather than just repeating old myths about how science works. For example, here’s a scholarly article on the exact question you mention - how and where peer review came to be seen as a guarantor of scientific quality: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/700070 https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/700070 (tldr: it wasn’t the 17th century Royal Society; it’s much more recent.)