Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Thursday, May 16, 11:11:54am

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, [10] ]

Subject: Weaknesses in Science Author: Damoclese [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 12/ 9/02 5:29pm Science in my opinion is by far the best way to obtain knowledge about the world. The checks and balances within science are such that personal prejudice and agendas are hard pressed to make it through the cogs and wheels of the scientific machine without being torn to shreds. That being said, I feel that certain weaknesses are apparent to me in the overall design of science. Perhaps the most aggravating weakness in science is the perserverence of tenacity among many of those who comprise the pieces. One is hard pressed to get even the faintest consideration for an idea that deviates from the generally accepted model of how things "are". Given time and the appropriate evidence, these ideas might make it through, but they depend heavily on the bravery of those who aren't afraid to sacrifice their reputation on something potentially erroneous. To me, this isn't the way science should be conducted. One ought not be derided because of their espousal of a certain model that happened to be less than perfect, and scientists ought to be trained well enough to accept that some ideas having no evidence for them or against them are not necessarily without value or merit. New ideas often bring a different way of looking at problems, and different ways of looking at problems often yeilds answers that might have been otherwise overlooked. I suppose then that we can liken the current state of science as a machine which is ponderous and rusty; all of the cogs turning inefficently, but turning nonetheless. Perhaps the viscus fluid of new ideas might be just the thing science needs. Damoclese [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject Author Date There are still too many kooks about QUITTNER 12/10/02 2:03pm Constraints -- Damoclese, 12/10/02 6:41pm Kookiness -- QUITTNER, 12/16/02 11:20am