3 ms·

When there is no reliable review mechanism, then the process is inherently flawed. It may be science in your book but following that definition, everything anyo

When there is no reliable review mechanism, then the process is inherently flawed. It may be science in your book but following that definition, everything anyone studies and publishes is science. Homeopathy is science by that definition. Flat earth studies too. There needs to be proper scrutiny to ensure minimal quality standards are at least followed, else the whole thing is bunk. A study that can not be replicated by anyone is not research, it's monkeys hitting keys without understanding what they're doing. Sadly monkeys with PhDs in some cases but that doesn't change anything. The distinguishing feature of what "real science" is in the eye of the believer seems to be someone holding an academic title, i.e. an argument from authority, not verifiable standards that exclude randomness. There is nothing scientific about belief.

jltsiren 4y ago
Mechanisms and rules are the problem, not the solution. The reason we got the reproducibility crisis in the first place is because too many people believe in rules. They believe that if you discover something by following the accepted rules of science, you have a scientific result. But when you have a system, you always have people gaming it. People who believe that it's ok to bend the rules a bit. People who believe it's ok to break them, as long as you don't get caught. If you don't get caught, people who believe in the rules are inclined to accept your results, as you followed the rules. By changing the rules, you deal with specific symptoms, but the underlying problem remains. The people gaming the system always win in the end. And sometimes the rules are simply insufficient. When science works, it works because people go beyond the rules. It works because people are skeptical of their own ideas and willing to show their best efforts to test them. You can't cultivate attitudes like that with rules and regulations.

jltsiren 4y ago

Mechanisms and rules are the problem, not the solution. The reason we got the reproducibility crisis in the first place is because too many people believe in rules. They believe that if you discover something by following the accepted rules of science, you have a scientific result. But when you have a system, you always have people gaming it. People who believe that it's ok to bend the rules a bit. People who believe it's ok to break them, as long as you don't get caught. If you don't get caught, people who believe in the rules are inclined to accept your results, as you followed the rules. By changing the rules, you deal with specific symptoms, but the underlying problem remains. The people gaming the system always win in the end. And sometimes the rules are simply insufficient. When science works, it works because people go beyond the rules. It works because people are skeptical of their own ideas and willing to show their best efforts to test them. You can't cultivate attitudes like that with rules and regulations.