For science to work, it has to be re-evaluated, scientists fall in love with their ideas, get their own identity and self worth enmeshed with the concepts they are exploring and can become even more dogmatic than the priests of the dark ages. Sciences funding and peer review systems is badly corrupted in many fields, especially that have to do with commodities, energy and the places where the costs of production are hidden. Ie our bodies. If Science was really clean, then biology would be the master science that all others had to account to, on open cost/benefit feasibility studies before engaging in massively disrupting techlnology adpotation. I agree with the sentiment of the post, totally, and open comms such as this may help, even from non trained emotionally savvy critical thinkers.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
@freemoceanisnow what you describe is a very toxic attitude indeed, but given that Science is an activity carried out by human beings, it is bound to deal with the flaws of those involved (big egos, stubbornness, greed, dishonesty).
The good thing is, with the accelerated means of communication now it's easier to unveil some of these misdeeds, or at least to present significant opposition to them (which sometimes can also be a negative thing, but I digress).
Exactly, all that is needed to understand science and even contribute to it is to have a logical, critical way of thinking. It comes down to us, the ones with the scientific background, to present things in an understandable and clear way.