To many, science is the process of discovery and trying to find the 'facts' of how the world works. It is supposed to be unbiased, nonpartisan, and pure. But don't ever forget that science is done and practiced by human beings, all of whom are imperfect, have biases, and make mistakes, just like everyone else. We are not 'all knowing' and have all the answers, and we never will.
Having said this, what is the real story for how scientists go about their work? How do we know whether or not to believe a scientific claim by others? How and why should we evaluate others' work to justify their conclusions, especially when it is something important in the field or something never seen or claimed by anyone before?
Check out this nice piece, from Symmetry magazine (this is very good if you like particle physics), which uses examples from particle physics to demonstrate how science is actually a little messy, but most importantly human - and 'facts' in science do change! Scientists are willing to change their minds over time as new results, often the result of new technologies and methods and data sets, because discovering real truth is a long, difficult process. There always is and should be debate and skepticism, but also open minds that are willing to accept new results that contradict old ones. There needs to be an open process or peer reviewed publications and presentations at conferences, so other experts can review a colleague's work openly and completely to check for mistakes or misinterpretations of the data. This is why it takes time to do science the 'right way.'
No comments:
Post a Comment