Quote:
Originally Posted by JM
Lets flip the tables here for a moment, we spend enough time talking about the fundamentalist believer
It's no surprise to find that Science has its own share of Fundamentalist Scientists
Whats your thoughts on it?
|
There may be, but they don't last for too long as leaders in their field. If in science someone clings to an untenable idea, they will at some point be shown wrong when someone thinks up a new experiment to answer the controversial question. Those who are shown to be wrong have to get with it, or lose credibility. And with that, usually their financing. So there is a sort of evolution at work, call it 'natural credibility selection', to let those who don't adapt fade away. It can take some time. The different views of whether the dinosaurs were warm or cold blooded lasted more than a century I believe. But eventually there was broad agreement. And that example is the longest lasting one I can think of from the top of my head. Another example would be Fred Hoyle, who thought the universe was infinitely old and didn't have a beginning. When the discovery of cosmic background radiation showed him wrong, he couldn't accept it. And while he had done great other work in his career, it did make him a laughing stock.
When your ideas are shown to be wrong, the natural inclination seems to be to stick up for them. It can be difficult to swallow the bad news. But as a scientist you have to. Most do after a while and maybe some pulling. And those who don't, well, screw them, no need to take them into consideration any longer.
greets,
Peter