3 ms·

I think "consensus" is a term we should all be wary of no matter what the argument. In order to discover merits of an argument one needs to really dig into the

by 13years 12y ago

I think "consensus" is a term we should all be wary of no matter what the argument. In order to discover merits of an argument one needs to really dig into the evidence on both sides regardless of so called consensus. I recall about over 15 years ago how all my peers and many experts in the industry said the "consensus" on building web services was to use SOAP BPEL and develop using waterfall methodologies. At that time Agile development and REST services might have been considered quackery.

frostmatthew 12y ago
> In order to discover merits of an argument one needs to really dig into the evidence on both sides regardless of so called consensus. One of the links in my comment was to GENERA[1], a large database of peer reviewed GMO studies, feel free to "dig" away. > 15 years ago how all my peers and many experts in the industry said the "consensus" on building web services was to use SOAP BPEL First of all that's just generic use of the word consensus[2], not quite the same as the concept of scientific consensus[3]. Scientific consensus can certainly change over time (you wouldn't want science to just assume whatever if previously thought was right, would you?) but that doesn't mean we should dismiss the current collective judgment of scientists because they might change their position X years from now. [1] http://genera.biofortified.org/ http://genera.biofortified.org/ [2] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/consensus https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/consensus [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus
- 13years 12y ago
  It doesn't mean dismiss, but likewise it also shouldn't be the means to dismiss opposing arguments for which it most often used. What we think of scientific consensus may not be what it actually is in reality. https://plus.google.com/+ChrisReeveOnlineScientificDiscourseIsBroken/posts/FAxVc3coJVJ?pid=6096228074938200130&oid=108466508041843226480 https://plus.google.com/+ChrisReeveOnlineScientificDiscourse...

by 13years 12y ago

frostmatthew 12y ago

> In order to discover merits of an argument one needs to really dig into the evidence on both sides regardless of so called consensus. One of the links in my comment was to GENERA[1], a large database of peer reviewed GMO studies, feel free to "dig" away. > 15 years ago how all my peers and many experts in the industry said the "consensus" on building web services was to use SOAP BPEL First of all that's just generic use of the word consensus[2], not quite the same as the concept of scientific consensus[3]. Scientific consensus can certainly change over time (you wouldn't want science to just assume whatever if previously thought was right, would you?) but that doesn't mean we should dismiss the current collective judgment of scientists because they might change their position X years from now. [1] http://genera.biofortified.org/ http://genera.biofortified.org/ [2] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/consensus https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/consensus [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus

13years 12y ago
It doesn't mean dismiss, but likewise it also shouldn't be the means to dismiss opposing arguments for which it most often used. What we think of scientific consensus may not be what it actually is in reality. https://plus.google.com/+ChrisReeveOnlineScientificDiscourseIsBroken/posts/FAxVc3coJVJ?pid=6096228074938200130&oid=108466508041843226480 https://plus.google.com/+ChrisReeveOnlineScientificDiscourse...