5 ms·

Science is not an organization, business, or any single entity and discussing it as such is ridiculous. How would you implement changes?

madsbuch 4y ago
It is an institution though. With very strict rules regarding the scientific method.
- orhmeh09 4y ago
  These rules are not as strict as one might think, especially when they’re tied up with people’s careers—consider the reproducibility crisis for instance.
  - madsbuch 4y ago
    they ought to be, though not all people have the integrity.
  - madsbuch 4y ago
    I am actually following a course right now. Self paid. It costs roughly USD 1000 to follow and is done by a renowned University. The lecturer just released an exam which is utterly unreadable. He is not a native english speaker. But there are several grammatical errors. The progression is bad, etc. He introduces non-existing terms (Like innovation application) and is incoherent. Obviously the teacher did his best. But i really think it begs a question to whether that is good enough. People should not be doing things they are not competent at.
- ivalm 4y ago
  No, there absolutely no strict rules regarding the scientific method. At most there are conventions about the structure of papers in some journals.
  - madsbuch 4y ago
    that regards form, which indeed is not a part of the institution.
jmaygarden 4y ago
It doesn’t appear that you read the article. Social science journals definitely are organizations, businesses and/or single entities that could change.
- themitigating 4y ago
  Journals just publish studies and things like that
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ajkjk 4y ago
Whether or not that's the case, it's obviously possible for loose-knit organizations to change. That's basically the role of philosophy, or more specifically, convincing people to do something different with argument.
nordsieck 4y ago
> How would you implement changes? It's pretty easy: you add requirements to accepting federal grant money.
collyw 4y ago
Fauci told us he was the science.

madsbuch 4y ago

It is an institution though. With very strict rules regarding the scientific method.

orhmeh09 4y ago
These rules are not as strict as one might think, especially when they’re tied up with people’s careers—consider the reproducibility crisis for instance.
- madsbuch 4y ago
  they ought to be, though not all people have the integrity.
- madsbuch 4y ago
  I am actually following a course right now. Self paid. It costs roughly USD 1000 to follow and is done by a renowned University. The lecturer just released an exam which is utterly unreadable. He is not a native english speaker. But there are several grammatical errors. The progression is bad, etc. He introduces non-existing terms (Like innovation application) and is incoherent. Obviously the teacher did his best. But i really think it begs a question to whether that is good enough. People should not be doing things they are not competent at.
ivalm 4y ago
No, there absolutely no strict rules regarding the scientific method. At most there are conventions about the structure of papers in some journals.
- madsbuch 4y ago
  that regards form, which indeed is not a part of the institution.

jmaygarden 4y ago

It doesn’t appear that you read the article. Social science journals definitely are organizations, businesses and/or single entities that could change.

themitigating 4y ago
Journals just publish studies and things like that

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

ajkjk 4y ago

Whether or not that's the case, it's obviously possible for loose-knit organizations to change. That's basically the role of philosophy, or more specifically, convincing people to do something different with argument.

nordsieck 4y ago

> How would you implement changes? It's pretty easy: you add requirements to accepting federal grant money.

collyw 4y ago

Fauci told us he was the science.