4 ms·

Lovely article. It reminds me of the relationship of scurvy and Vitamin C. Despite scurvy being largely understood around 1750 the knowledge was forgotten or re

Lovely article. It reminds me of the relationship of scurvy and Vitamin C. Despite scurvy being largely understood around 1750 the knowledge was forgotten or replaced with wrong theories as late as 1911. https://idlewords.com/2010/03/scott_and_scurvy.htm https://idlewords.com/2010/03/scott_and_scurvy.htm

routerl 3y ago
Lovely. Thanks for posting that. With all our popular narratives about the inevitability of scientific progress, it's always refreshing (from a historical point of view) and important (from a personal, ethical perspective) to remember that there's no guarantee that chronologically later developments will necessarily be improvements on earlier conclusions. It brings to mind our current replication crises in science.
- vladms 3y ago
  Depends what you mean by "development", as the article does not describe developments on treating scurvy, but rather somehow random actions based on wrong assumptions (ex: limes are the same as lemons; acidity is all that matters). And even if in this case the initial solution was correct, it was still observing a correlation, as they had no clue why lemons do the job. My conclusion based on the article is that just experimenting is not enough, you also need to develop and test a complex understanding of the system. We probably don't cherish enough as a society, that some of us (as in: trained researchers, etc.) have a mindset that expects both replication and understanding, even if being humans we don't always reach this ideal.
chihuahua 3y ago
The article you're linking to is one of my favorite pieces of writing ever.
- NelsonMinar 3y ago
  Maciej has a real gift for writing. His three part travelogue of visiting Yemen has been on my mind a lot recently. He published the first installment just a few months before the civil war started. https://idlewords.com/2015/05/ta_izz.htm https://idlewords.com/2015/05/ta_izz.htm
pixl97 3y ago
Before the internet I was like "how could we lose information like that and replace it with junk", but now I'm like "oh, I see exactly how that happens"
Kalium 3y ago
It's worth noting the critical details: how to prevent scurvy was understood, but the underlying mechanisms were not. This mattered because it meant why the treatment worked was not understood, with the result being a resurgence when a supposedly effective treatment turned out to be ineffectual. Basically, it's easy to think we understand something when we have a solution to it, but the two should not be automatically conflated.

routerl 3y ago

Lovely. Thanks for posting that. With all our popular narratives about the inevitability of scientific progress, it's always refreshing (from a historical point of view) and important (from a personal, ethical perspective) to remember that there's no guarantee that chronologically later developments will necessarily be improvements on earlier conclusions. It brings to mind our current replication crises in science.

vladms 3y ago
Depends what you mean by "development", as the article does not describe developments on treating scurvy, but rather somehow random actions based on wrong assumptions (ex: limes are the same as lemons; acidity is all that matters). And even if in this case the initial solution was correct, it was still observing a correlation, as they had no clue why lemons do the job. My conclusion based on the article is that just experimenting is not enough, you also need to develop and test a complex understanding of the system. We probably don't cherish enough as a society, that some of us (as in: trained researchers, etc.) have a mindset that expects both replication and understanding, even if being humans we don't always reach this ideal.

chihuahua 3y ago

The article you're linking to is one of my favorite pieces of writing ever.

NelsonMinar 3y ago
Maciej has a real gift for writing. His three part travelogue of visiting Yemen has been on my mind a lot recently. He published the first installment just a few months before the civil war started. https://idlewords.com/2015/05/ta_izz.htm https://idlewords.com/2015/05/ta_izz.htm

pixl97 3y ago

Before the internet I was like "how could we lose information like that and replace it with junk", but now I'm like "oh, I see exactly how that happens"

Kalium 3y ago

It's worth noting the critical details: how to prevent scurvy was understood, but the underlying mechanisms were not. This mattered because it meant why the treatment worked was not understood, with the result being a resurgence when a supposedly effective treatment turned out to be ineffectual. Basically, it's easy to think we understand something when we have a solution to it, but the two should not be automatically conflated.