-
Isn’t it both? The western scientific method isn’t perfect, ironic hubristic claims aside (not you personally). It is however, far and away the best method we have.
Do correct me if I’m wrong, I’m not a pro at this.
Scientific knowledge is valid until new scientific knowledge proves it invalid. The pyramid of knowledge that results is a feature, but also a problem. In this case, there would’ve been thousands of doctors denying patients treatment for Alzheimer’s, basing their assessments on conventionally held scientific knowledge that was later proven wrong. Even if doctors and patients’ families claimed their patient had Alzheimer’s, their theories would’ve been dismissed because they ran counter to better established “scientific fact”. Thousands if not millions of people were harmed because important decisions were taken based on forged facts.l
That’s not ideal, and I believe humans can find a way to improve it someday.
You are reading a single comment by @Muc-ed-off and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Muc-ed-off
It's not an issue with the scientific method, it's an issue with the peer review process