4 ms·
I’ve been saying this for a while - science is great at breaking things down to the atomic level and figuring out what does what, individually. But science some
by polalavik 4y ago
I’ve been saying this for a while - science is great at breaking things down to the atomic level and figuring out what does what, individually. But science sometimes is not so good at the systematic, or synergistic view of multiple variables. We keep trying to break things down to one variable that cures all when it’s probably a mixture of a lot of things + different for people with different genetic.
- yieldcrv 4y agoI wonder if its as fundamental as needing a different "scientific method".
- airstrike 4y agoBlockchain, DeSci, science3.0
- eggnet 4y agoSome problems are harder to solve than others. It usually stems from a long testing period. Try X, wait. Try Y, wait. If the wait period is decades, you have a problem. Broadly, statistics and large sample sets are used to combat that. Human understanding, or lack thereof, for a given problem also contributes to suboptimal theories. Ultimately, hard problems are hard.
- whatshisface 4y agoYou can't get to the systematic view of multiple variables until you know the individual variables.