Tuesday, July 27, 2010

The trouble with experts ...

... according to Richard Feynman: The Difference between ‘True Science’ and ‘Cargo-Cult Science’.

… there is one feature I notice that is generally missing in cargo cult science. … It’s a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty — a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you’re doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid — not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you’ve eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked — to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.

5 comments:

  1. True, unless your experiment is in the political field. Then such behavior will be denigrated as weak, indecisive, too intellectual, viz, Adlai Stevenson.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Only politics, I think we all agree, is not science, and has no experts -- unless you consider winning a sign of expertise.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Maybe "politics" is one the sciences taught by Professor Quincy Wagstaff, of Huxley College.

    :-)

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree that politics is not a science although a number of universities have Departments of Political Science, and students can graduate with degrees in Political Science.
    Still, I believe that Feynman's call for "a kind of utter honesty - a kind of leaning over backwards" can be usefully applied to a number of important endeavors, including the political one.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well, Lincoln, you're sure in hell right about that, though it is rare indeed.

    ReplyDelete