Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Big Think)   It's not your imagination: scientists really are hostile to new ideas. But there are quite a few good reasons why   (bigthink.com) divider line
35
    More: Interesting, Cosmic microwave background, Gravity, Speed of light, Science, Observation, Truth, Experiment, Big Bang  
•       •       •

564 clicks; posted to STEM » on 02 Feb 2023 at 2:50 PM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



35 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
Lochsteppe
2023-02-02 1:38:10 PM  
Because science is only fun if you're the one who gets to shout "Eureka!"
 
sleze
2023-02-02 2:51:44 PM  
i.pinimg.comView Full Size
 
Boudyro [TotalFark]
2023-02-02 2:56:31 PM  
Insisting that you show evidence for why a new idea should replace the existing paradigm is not hostility.
 
LewDux [OhFark]
2023-02-02 2:58:47 PM  
Comicwithbillboardnexttophysicsinstitutethatsays"wealreadyconierredthatpossibilitty".jpg
/dnrtfa
 
Boudyro [TotalFark]
2023-02-02 2:59:05 PM  

Boudyro: Insisting that you show evidence for why a new idea should replace the existing paradigm is not hostility.


Fark Ethan and stop farking linking to every stupid thing he publishes you farking asshole subby is hostility.
 
SBinRR [OhFark]
2023-02-02 2:59:11 PM  
It's like these scientists have some kind of method. One where you try to disprove your own ideas and propositions to see if they are legit.
 
natazha [BareFark]
2023-02-02 3:02:07 PM  
Big "Think" is all the reason I need.
 
jso2897
2023-02-02 3:11:11 PM  
Compared to whom?
 
gbv23
2023-02-02 3:15:34 PM  
Nobody cares about "evidence"

They'll find out I was right when they die, and go to the between-life

i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
AdrienVeidt
2023-02-02 3:18:52 PM  

LewDux: Comicwithbillboardnexttophysicsinstitutethatsays"wealreadyconierredthatpossibilitty".jpg
/dnrtfa


A) You're supposed to capitilize each new word to break it all up into readability, and
B) You're supposed to spell everything correctly.
C) The only punctuation should be the extention period.

ComicWithBillboardNextToPhysicsInstituteThatSaysWeAlreadyConsideredThatPossibility.jpg
 
tintar [TotalFark]
2023-02-02 3:20:37 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
tintar [TotalFark]
2023-02-02 3:23:00 PM  
random eejit: want to see my perpetual {energy, motion} machine?
me: hmm, how have you not burned down the entire universe yet.
RE: ???
 
TWX
2023-02-02 3:25:17 PM  

Boudyro: Insisting that you show evidence for why a new idea should replace the existing paradigm is not hostility.


There are occasional incidents where scientists, even fairly renowned scientists, would not recognize or accept new science.

That said, when that occurs, if that new science is really better than the existing paradigm then the holdouts that refuse to acknowledge the paradigm shift end up being left behind, and risk irrelevancy.

I understand and appreciate skepticism.  Scientific skepticism is necessary for the process to work, because it requires something sitting sitting in the range of better, more compelling evidence to proof.  But with that sort of strength of evidence a good scientist should recognize when it's appropriate to embrace new versus holding onto existing beliefs.
 
Stephen_Falken [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-02 3:33:40 PM  
SHUT UP BIG THINK
 
I Like Bread
2023-02-02 3:37:14 PM  
Because science can only be replaced with BETTER SCIENCE. Incomplete theories do not give you permission to substitute whatever made-up nonsense supports your closed-minded agenda.
 
LewDux [OhFark]
2023-02-02 3:45:08 PM  

Stephen_Falken: SHUT UP BIG THINK


Boudyro: Boudyro: Insisting that you show evidence for why a new idea should replace the existing paradigm is not hostility.

Fark Ethan and stop farking linking to every stupid thing he publishes you farking asshole subby is hostility.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
leeksfromchichis [TotalFark]
2023-02-02 3:47:10 PM  

I Like Bread: Because science can only be replaced with BETTER SCIENCE. Incomplete theories do not give you permission to substitute whatever made-up nonsense supports your closed-minded agenda.


Science is FALSE.  That's it, full stop.

We don't and really can't know what is. All we have for certain is a crazy amount of meticulously recorded failed experiments that unambiguously determined what isn't going on.  Successful experiments' hypotheses aren't true, just not falsified yet.

We enough about what isn't true to do all kinds of amazing things now. We can build sexbots, robots you can have sex with but shouldn't, and even robots you want to have sex with but have to go Mars to meet.  But we don't yet have a micron of truth.
 
Nullav
2023-02-02 3:50:11 PM  
Good, as long as the "overwhelming evidence" criteria isn't satisfied. We'd still be recreationally banging rocks together if a significant number of people in positions to advance their fields were easily sidetracked by every "maybe." But scientists aren't just a dozen guys in a crazy lab pushing the "demote Pluto" button on a whim; there will be people to chase those other ideas at some point, though many of those ideas will only attract small groups until a "holy shiat" moment that probably won't ever come. If it does, we now have a near light-speed, planet-scale megaphone with which to alert others in adjacent fields and quickly grow interest in a particular area of study.

AD(H)D(4K(HDR)) might get you an admirable polymath here and there if the disorder and funding line up, but it's no way to pursue the ever-loving fark out of one branch of one field of study. shiat, we still gain knowledge in the end when people spend years or decades to find out they took a dead-end route; we get rigorous documentation of just how wrong it was, and it might've still spurred research in other directions that lead to positive results.

The scientific method is built around attacking new ideas to find the ones that survive.
 
PartTimeBuddha [OhFark]
2023-02-02 3:59:59 PM  

SBinRR: It's like these scientists have some kind of method. One where you try to disprove your own ideas and propositions to see if they are legit.


Gosh dog it, if only there was a single phrase that could express ^this idea!
 
PartTimeBuddha [OhFark]
2023-02-02 4:28:38 PM  

leeksfromchichis: Science is FALSE.  That's it, full stop.

We don't and really can't know what is.


This reminds me of my student days. I was in a park on a summer's day, just kinda wandering around, nothing doing. At some point, I remained still, breathing the air and watching the clouds, and a dog came up to me and started pissing on my leg. I was no canine psychology specialist, but i had, at that time, an aversion to being pissed on--I was young, and didn't need the money--so I became troubled.

"Oh, God," said the dog's owner. "He doesn't usually blah blah blah."

I stroked my barely-formed beard and said, "Curious. Out of all the trees and all the legs in this park, your dog has chosen to piss on mine. This requires formal experiment."

This, obviously, led to funding from Warwick University for a series of double-blind experiments. We recruited 20 undergrads to walk in the park with the self-same dog let off the leash--usually on Saturdays, with occasional Sundays. In 98% of cases, the dog would urinate on trees, or posts, or other small scale landmarks. It wasn't a great sample size, but over the course of months only about four students' legs became the recipients of the hound's attention. Three were male, one female.
 
DVD
2023-02-02 4:34:41 PM  
I enjoy Big Think articles.

Come at me with the "stop liking" memes.
 
PartTimeBuddha [OhFark]
2023-02-02 4:37:03 PM  
The Planet That Was Willed Into Being | Vulcan
Youtube uY4vsJNouPE
 
PartTimeBuddha [OhFark]
2023-02-02 4:43:54 PM  

DVD: I enjoy Big Think articles.

Come at me with the "stop liking" memes.


Why? If you like it, you like it. Why Siegel turns up daily on Fark threads is another issue.
 
rewind2846
2023-02-02 5:07:50 PM  
What the idea is is not the problem. Where it likely came from is the problem.
Those "new ideas" all too frequently come from the land of "pulled out of your ass", with no experimentation, testing, peer review, proof or even explanation. It's as if the people who have them expect everyone to believe their veracity "just because" and not "just because we tested and mathed and shat and this was the result".

Science is not just about what you say is true, it's proving that what others say is untrue if it contradicts.

Witness the still-developing COVID clusterfark for proof, right here in this and so many other forums. It's understandable that people with, you know, degrees and study and years in the lab just MIGHT be skeptical at some weeb's screeching on twitter.
 
Tom Marvolo Bombadil
2023-02-02 5:18:31 PM  

DVD: I enjoy Big Think articles.

Come at me with the "stop liking" memes.


The articles are about as exciting and illuminating as a half eaten leftover bowl of oatmeal set aflame, but I do enjoy these threads.
 
hegelsghost
2023-02-02 5:21:21 PM  

rewind2846: What the idea is is not the problem. Where it likely came from is the problem.
Those "new ideas" all too frequently come from the land of "pulled out of your ass", with no experimentation, testing, peer review, proof or even explanation. It's as if the people who have them expect everyone to believe their veracity "just because" and not "just because we tested and mathed and shat and this was the result".

Science is not just about what you say is true, it's proving that what others say is untrue if it contradicts.

Witness the still-developing COVID clusterfark for proof, right here in this and so many other forums. It's understandable that people with, you know, degrees and study and years in the lab just MIGHT be skeptical at some weeb's screeching on twitter.


This is not necessarily true. Lee Smolin has some pretty out there views, but he has also come up with some creative means to test them.  String theory, while is/was orthodox is not testable.. How about that?
 
New Farkin User Name
2023-02-02 5:40:05 PM  

hegelsghost: rewind2846: What the idea is is not the problem. Where it likely came from is the problem.
Those "new ideas" all too frequently come from the land of "pulled out of your ass", with no experimentation, testing, peer review, proof or even explanation. It's as if the people who have them expect everyone to believe their veracity "just because" and not "just because we tested and mathed and shat and this was the result".

Science is not just about what you say is true, it's proving that what others say is untrue if it contradicts.

Witness the still-developing COVID clusterfark for proof, right here in this and so many other forums. It's understandable that people with, you know, degrees and study and years in the lab just MIGHT be skeptical at some weeb's screeching on twitter.

This is not necessarily true. Lee Smolin has some pretty out there views, but he has also come up with some creative means to test them.  String theory, while is/was orthodox is not testable.. How about that?


You will note that string theory isn't/wasn't orthodox and many physicists dislike(d) it because there is no evidence for it because it's untestable

// it's less "untestable" then "unfalsifiable" because of how many varieties you can conjure, but whatever
 
PartTimeBuddha [OhFark]
2023-02-02 5:49:28 PM  
Why String Theory is Right
Youtube iTTa9YcTe1k
 
PartTimeBuddha [OhFark]
2023-02-02 5:49:59 PM  
Why String Theory is Wrong
Youtube IhpGdumLRqs
 
leeksfromchichis [TotalFark]
2023-02-02 5:51:57 PM  

PartTimeBuddha: [YouTube video: Why String Theory is Right]


Ah, PBS spacetime.

Modmins, Drew, watch this. THIS is the kind of shiat we want on STEM, not Big Stink.
 
hegelsghost
2023-02-02 5:54:24 PM  

New Farkin User Name: hegelsghost: rewind2846: What the idea is is not the problem. Where it likely came from is the problem.
Those "new ideas" all too frequently come from the land of "pulled out of your ass", with no experimentation, testing, peer review, proof or even explanation. It's as if the people who have them expect everyone to believe their veracity "just because" and not "just because we tested and mathed and shat and this was the result".

Science is not just about what you say is true, it's proving that what others say is untrue if it contradicts.

Witness the still-developing COVID clusterfark for proof, right here in this and so many other forums. It's understandable that people with, you know, degrees and study and years in the lab just MIGHT be skeptical at some weeb's screeching on twitter.

This is not necessarily true. Lee Smolin has some pretty out there views, but he has also come up with some creative means to test them.  String theory, while is/was orthodox is not testable.. How about that?

You will note that string theory isn't/wasn't orthodox and many physicists dislike(d) it because there is no evidence for it because it's untestable

// it's less "untestable" then "unfalsifiable" because of how many varieties you can conjure, but whatever


Okay, I was working with a layperson's understanding that unfortunately is filtered via a laypersons often clickaby press. FWIW i have found Sabine Hossenfelder's videos to provide a nice counterpoint to the more exotic claims, though she herself goes beyond empirical data when, e.g. she endorses determinism (I don't think she'd deny that this is a theoretical leap beyond data)
 
PartTimeBuddha [OhFark]
2023-02-02 6:39:22 PM  

hegelsghost: FWIW i have found Sabine Hossenfelder's videos to provide a nice counterpoint


Sabine is great for that. Though I would not recommend, at all, any video where she "sings".
 
dsmith42 [TotalFark]
2023-02-02 10:41:28 PM  
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it ...

An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents: it rarely happens that Saul becomes Paul. What does happen is that its opponents gradually die out, and that the growing generation is familiarized with the ideas from the beginning: another instance of the fact that the future lies with the youth.
-Max Planck, Scientific autobiography, 1950, p. 33, 97
Colloquially, this is often paraphrased as "Science progresses one funeral at a time".
 
PartTimeBuddha [OhFark]
2023-02-03 3:59:43 AM  
This is quite fun:

Muonium: The Atom That Breaks All The Rules
Youtube KrabgulN1L8
 
Don Gato
2023-02-03 5:13:47 AM  
morbotron.comView Full Size
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

Total access
Total knowledge
Total Fark

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.