RE: Paradigm Shifting & The trouble with modern science
Appreciate your effort and expressing your thoughts eloquently. However, I feel you deeply misunderstand the scientific method. What you hear on media and random articles are not science. Indeed, most scientific papers are rejected on scrutiny and peer review, which is the central tenet of the scientific method. Hypotheses turn to theories only when the experiments are repeated by multiple scientists across the world with a 99.99999...% (six sigma) replicability. That is science, and it is the only objective measure of reality.
The true problem is not with the scientific method but with modern scientists feeling pressured to publish papers by establishments, and the media going along with random articles willy nilly. The public should not know about any scientific hypotheses until it's extensively peer reviewed. (PS: Of course, the material should be accessible publically, but it should not be dumbed down and misinterpreted as the media does)
Thank you kindly for your detailed response to my thoughts. I appreciate your words and I completely see your perspective.
However, I wonder how many unseen factors there may be whilst attempting to prove a hypothesis, especially by multiple scientists across the world? Even the desires of these scientists has been shown in some cases to affect the outcome of the experiment itself. And who knows what else needs to be taken into consideration?
I believe humans still have much to learn. Yet conclusions are drawn as if they are a consistent truth. But from my perspective it would seem as if they are nothing more than our best guess, made with our current understanding of the factors at play.
I certainly agree that modern scientists must feel the pressure of media or money related influences. Even the desired outcome of those who fund these experiments must surely be a factor?
I look forward to chatting with you more :)
That's your other mistaken assumption, no scientist worth their salt would think they have got it all figured out. In fact, their whole job is to question everything. Science is continuing process about understanding the Universe, one that never stops. There would be no General Relativity if Einstein had thought Newton's laws were the ultimate truth. That doesn't mean Newton was wrong - of course he wasn't - it's just that there may always be a more complete theory, and that's what scientists are always looking for.
Till then, scientists will hold the theory that explains the most and is most intensively peer-reviewed most to the highest standard.
Indeed, it's the media that goes around brandishing things as "facts". That's not a problem with the scientific method.
The vast majority don't and, there are no desired outcomes for research. The data is what it is and we report it. If it confirms prior work, so be it. If it contradicts it, so be it.