PDA

View Full Version : Do scientists sometimes hide what they find in the eye of the general public



The Occult
27 September 2011, 10:51 PM
Do you feel that scientists dont reveal much of what they discover?

Scientists always talking about rationality,order and reason but when I looked at some of the programs in BBC related to quantum mechanics,cosmology, it seems that science is equally crazy and weird as religion.But after all the universe is one heck of a crazy place where sanity seems to be an illusion.But outside ,in front of the general public they come back to rationalism,reasoning,logic,evidence,facts.

That makes me think that probably scientists are quite wary of what they have found but are not willing to reveal to the public due to ego problem or probably due to problems religions might pose if they reveal it.Honestly some religions are not good i interpreting facts, they make more fantasies out of it.

So do you see such a thing with scientists?

Kumar_Das
27 September 2011, 11:09 PM
Yup. Yup.

Kismet
27 September 2011, 11:10 PM
Do you feel that scientists dont reveal much of what they discover?

Scientists always talking about rationality,order and reason but when I looked at some of the programs in BBC related to quantum mechanics,cosmology, it seems that science is equally crazy and weird as religion.But after all the universe is one heck of a crazy place where sanity seems to be an illusion.But outside ,in front of the general public they come back to rationalism,reasoning,logic,evidence,facts.

That makes me think that probably scientists are quite wary of what they have found but are not willing to reveal to the public due to ego problem or probably due to problems religions might pose if they reveal it.Honestly some religions are not good i interpreting facts, they make more fantasies out of it.

So do you see such a thing with scientists?

There actually is (last time I heard) a perfectly logical (consistent) explanation of Quantum Mechanics (the Bohmian Interpretation). But, there are some who argued, and perhaps still argue, that this is an overly complex interpretation and some, like Hilary Putnam, argued for 25+ that revoking certain logical laws (the law of excluded middle, for instance, that says something cannot be in an in-between state in terms of being or not being) is preferable explanatory-wise.

I myself am, with all due respect, clueless about higher science. These are just the most authoritative voices I have heard to this date.

Mana
28 September 2011, 01:57 AM
Namasté The Occult,

No I don't agree with your first statement, If anything Science suffers most from miss information and delusion caused by passionate scientists who search from love; yet for name and fame, many falsify their material when results no longer correspond to theory, finding it hard to it hard to let go of that reality (the one with their belief and name in it). So in effect maybe they don't hide enough; this is by no means all scientists, and pier group assessment exists for this very reason, it just takes time.

It is Economists, Businessmen, Generals, and Leaders who try to "control" knowledge.

This is human nature, the same struggles are present in Science as in other beliefs.

I would like to write a longer response, that your question inspires; I am otherwise engaged today.

I do recommend you write any question or subject into Google then on the results page go to the top and you will find an icon with "more" written onto it.
Click there; in the drop-down menu select "Scholar". Your results are filtered selecting only scientific and educational papers (http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=Xlo&rls=org.mozilla:fr:official&q=scientific+practices&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&biw=1355&bih=887&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=ws). Now I have no idea of the filter put in place by Google, one must always try to find as many sources as possible as the power in Google's hands by selecting what we find is formidable, never the less I find this to be an invaluable source of wisdom.

praNAma

mana

wundermonk
28 September 2011, 04:16 AM
I think we need to differentiate between two types of sciences:

(1)Math, Engineering, Chemistry, etc. - folks in this domain are extremely honest. Math is purely logic and there is no scope of hiding anything. Engineering and Chemistry are what have made our world what it is. The experiments and results in these are intersubjectively verifiable and testable.

(2)Economics, Physics, Biology, Archaeology, etc. - in this domain, even though math [impersonal and beautiful as she is] is used, a variety of other concerns override. In economics, whether one is a Marxist or libertarian is bound to affect which side you owe allegiance to. In physics, especially, in theories of cosmogony, quantum physics, etc. there is a lot of metaphysical stuff going on. There are varied interpretations of the same results leading to confusion amongst physicists themselves is my guess. We laymen are probably clueless.

I think, in general, that scientists are forced to be "secular" and keep God out of the picture at all costs probably because of issues like tenure or promotion, etc. which gets decided by other colleagues in the field. So, they have no reason to stick their neck out. Also, things like "God", "soul", "afterlife", etc. can possibly only be inferred. In Hindu philosophy, inference has always been given second priority over direct perception. Since direct perception has so far thus not been able to prove the existence of "God" or "soul" or "afterlife", most scientists [such as Mathematicians, economists, chemists, etc.] need not worry about them.

In any case, science should be respected. Scientists DO make falsifiable claims and are always on the lookout for new empirical data which will falsify the current hypothesis leading to a better understanding of reality.

Jainarayan
28 September 2011, 08:32 AM
Do you feel that scientists dont reveal much of what they discover?

Yes, and the reason, imo, is because unless and until they can prove their hypothoses and theories they are subject to ridicule by their peers. That can spell the death of their careers. Scientists can be a contentious lot.

Geoff Marcy, who proposed the idea of extra-solar planets back in the day, was almost laughed out of the field of astronomy because there was no proof. He stuck to his hypothosis and was eventually vindicated, and even lionized for his discoveries.

Einstein has been the exception, even though some of his theories are being questioned now, especially the speed of light being a cosmic constant and speed limit. Ironically he himself criticized some of his theories as being some of the biggest blunders of his career.


In any case, science should be respected. Scientists DO make falsifiable claims and are always on the lookout for new empirical data which will falsify the current hypothesis leading to a better understanding of reality.

^ This.

The Occult
28 September 2011, 09:12 AM
Wondermonk,I agree that science as well as scientists should be respected and honored for the efforts they take but the world scientists live are not just restricted to just scientists only, there is always a commercial side trying to exploit the scientific findings.Take for example, the research work being carried out,especially when its funded by a company.Sometimes these companies try to use the results of the research to their favor and sometimes people pay scientists a great deal of money to tamper the results in their favor

We hear suddenly hear someone saying "Coffee is good for health" and then the next day "Coffee is bad for health"..I sometimes tend to wonder how genuine these things are

But thats not the only reason they have to hide it, scientists too have their own ego over other scientists in the scientific community.Stephen Hawkins for example, made an extraordinary claim (that information gets lost in black holes) which he held on for 30 years even though deep down his heart he knew he was wrong

Rudy
28 September 2011, 02:19 PM
I bet scientists do sometimes make false claims if they dont want to show that their decade old theory is wrong. Losing your career is another motivators. But I'd say scientists are almost always honest.

Thats my two cents

wundermonk
29 September 2011, 12:23 AM
We hear suddenly hear someone saying "Coffee is good for health" and then the next day "Coffee is bad for health"..I sometimes tend to wonder how genuine these things are

I agree with this...corporate sponsored research DOES have issues. I still dont know whether multi-vitamin tablets are healthy or unhealthy...There seem to be so many contradictory reports on this and other issues.