[PREV - DOWN_TO_THE_BOTTOM] [TOP]
January 29, 2003
One thing I keep thinking (about
Wilson's "Consilience" and the CONSILIENCE_PRIZE
"Science Wars" aspect of it)...
If you played fair, wouldn't you
discuss the social underpinnings
to the scientific process?
The pomo doctrine that scientific theories
are no better than fictions is clearly pretty
weak, but if you really look at the scientific
edifice, you get into issues like:
o collaboration and trust
o imagination, elegance vs.
mathematic rigor and measurement
o risks of corruption from
economics or egocentricism
o checks on that corruption --
robust or fragile?
Isn't it at least possible that the
current social structures we use for
doing science aren't optimal?
What possible improvements
might there be?
(Myself, I sometimes wonder if the
collaboration of volunteers over
the internet might possibly bring
back an era where the amateur can
make real contributions.)
[NEXT - NATURE_OF_THE_WALLS]