IF SCIENTISTS ARE TOO RIGID IN IGNORING PHENOMENA THAT CANNOT BE EXPLAINED BY STANDARD THEORIES, THEY RISK IGNORING HINTS THAT MAY LEAD TO NEW AND BETTER THEORIES

Or as Professor LeGrand said in Drifting Continents and Shifting Theories:

"The presumed 'conservatism' of the scientific community, the possible effect of such social factors as Wegener's nationality or perceptions that he lacked credentials as a geologist, and the threat to established geological authority and authorities which his [continental drift] theory may have entailed, all may have raised the height of the hurdles his theory would have to clear to be accepted."

Consensus exists when people agree about something. They are more likely to agree when they share the same conclusions and the same raw material, methods and rules for arriving at those conclusions: the same facts, the same assumptions, the same inferences--compared to when they don't share these things.

There are two types of consensus, real and apparent. When people truly agree about something, that is real consensus. When some people act as if they agree with something when they really don't then they contribute to an appearance of consensus. There are many reasons to pretend to agree.

A general consensus exists when most people agree about something. But agreement is not the same as truth. And notice that "most" means that some do not agree. Why some people agree and others do not is an important issue in any area of investigation, on the way to creating or revising knowledge.

Agreement is called provisional when it is subject to later change. It says, "I agree for now, but may change my mind in the future, provided that___"

---

To what degree does

What is needed to create agreement? What is needed to create disagreement?

conflict with

What is needed to prove something is true? What is needed to prove something is untrue?

 

Basic_Ideas | Plate Tectonics | Technical_Arguments

Back to Pen Name | Main