The Paradoxical Scientist
Those who ridicule 'conspiracy theorists', or anyone who may hold a quite different radical viewpoint to mainstream thinking, are essentially closed-minded and rather naïve. Oddly, these people are in many cases scientists.
Quite the opposite, in fact, to what a scientist should be. Questioning and challenging. Exploring new ideas. Not accepting dogma and mantra. Properly examining claims and by quality argument proving claims to be unfounded if that’s what they truly believe. And can show. It takes courage and is not about belief systems.
This attitude in itself suggests manipulation and the price that must be paid by risking the professional reputation. If a claim cannot stand up to critical argument, then that’s that. If counter argument cannot persuade, then the viewpoint must be allowed to stand.
Otherwise, science itself can be ridiculed.
This is a very bad scenario.
Quite the opposite, in fact, to what a scientist should be. Questioning and challenging. Exploring new ideas. Not accepting dogma and mantra. Properly examining claims and by quality argument proving claims to be unfounded if that’s what they truly believe. And can show. It takes courage and is not about belief systems.
This attitude in itself suggests manipulation and the price that must be paid by risking the professional reputation. If a claim cannot stand up to critical argument, then that’s that. If counter argument cannot persuade, then the viewpoint must be allowed to stand.
Otherwise, science itself can be ridiculed.
This is a very bad scenario.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home