We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
This. As I understand it, the replication crisis isn't so much new data proves things wrong as that earlier studies accepted less rigorous proofs. Novel results are celebrated, confirming common sense not so much.
If you have to admit your paper is wrong after you publish it, it's too late.
I often know I might be wrong, but I don't let that kind of doubt paralyze me. I take what steps I can to guard against the possibility that I'm wrong, without trying to keep so many options open that I can't execute any plans involving risk.
I certainly don't cede all the important ground to any enemy just because I might be wrong. After all, my enemy may be wrong, too, and if I'm not sure, I'd rather go with my own judgment than that of something who doesn't want the best for me.
There's a lot of good discussion in this Vox article. I don't agree with everything in it, but that doesn't mean the whole thing should be ignored.
The animated GIF of the dots is fascinating. Click on it and watch it play all the way through its cycle. This is an illustration of what a good “explainer” does: they help us see, in new and different ways, what is already right in front of us. All of the following can be good “explainers”: scientists, philosophers, writers (think Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Herman Wouk, for example), poets, artists, etc. And of course teachers. The best leaders in any realm, including government, are good “explainers.”
The Switchel Blogger
Always amazed at so many who are brilliant in one area automatically think they are smart in everything. This is the first article to suggest maybe not.