Just the opposite - consider the replication crisis. Our a priori belief should be that any published paper in the social sciences is junk without extremely co

Just the opposite - consider the replication crisis. Our a priori belief should be that any published paper in the social sciences is junk without extremely compelling evidence to the contrary. This is an evidenced based position! Or, let’s completely disregard the studies themselves and look at the fruits of their labors. Is eg education noticeably better now than it was a generation ago? Is our mental health better now than then, etc etc.