What To Do, Scientifically, When Everyone Is Wrong
“Today, many issues in both science and society are erroneously framed in terms of a dichotomy: either it’s this one way that most people think it is, or it’s this other way that a small group of smart people, going against the consensus, think it is. But history has shown us that’s often not the case. Oftentimes, it’s the wild, out-of-the-box ideas that are not bound to the assumptions of prior generations that lead to our greatest advances. In science, following the evidence — and not any “common sense” prejudice we may have — is the key to success.
In the 19th century, everyone “knew” that the laws of nature were deterministic, but that assumption only held us back when it came to quantum mechanics. In the 18th century, everyone “knew” there were three dimensions, but that assumption held us back when it came to relativity. In the 16th century, everyone “knew” that planets moved along circular paths, but that assumption held back an understanding of gravitation. Today, there are lots of things everyone “knows” as well. Perhaps questioning and re-examining some of our most dearly held assumptions, and the false dichotomies they produce, are exactly what we need to push our scientific frontiers forward today.”
There are plenty of instances where one group of scientists advocates for a particular point of view, while another group advocates for a different point of view. It’s a scene from a classic Socratic dialogue: one side argues for “A” while another argues for “B,” and if side “B” can show the absurdity of side “A,” then side “B” must be the winner, right?
Not quite. Oftentimes, both A and B are wrong, and the answer requires an out-of-the-box thought entirely. Here’s some interesting food for thought.