3 ms·
To be fair all of that was up in question a century ago in the hard sciences. People used to believe in the plum pudding model, or doubt what component in the c
by kjkjadksj 2y ago
To be fair all of that was up in question a century ago in the hard sciences. People used to believe in the plum pudding model, or doubt what component in the cell contained genetic information. The only thing that changed that was incremental experimental evidence. Social sciences are evidently going through a similar transition but we shouldn’t use that to discredit the field alone, work is still able to stand for itself if it is done well.
- llamaimperative 2y agoThe level of ignorance of this basic, basic historical fact is just completely astounding on this website sometimes. It was called natural philosophy for Christ's sake. Modern medicine's forefather was heroic medicine, based on modulating the 4 humors (blood, phlegm, yellow bile, black bile). We didn't zap into existence with the hard sciences being hard. We made them that way through centuries of intellectual effort, almost all of which turned out to be wrong!