|
|
|
|
|
|
by mold_aid
20 days ago
|
|
|
>You could argue peer review has become a mechanism to encourage incrementalism. That it doesn’t reward big leaps. And the public isn’t getting ROI on science funding compared to 50 years ago. Are you arguing that or not Also: tenets >some might say theology - of the field Some might, I'm sure! Are you saying that? |
|
|
https://www.lesswrong.com/w/steelmanning
Personally, I am sympathetic to the idea that science has stagnated. But I do not think this is the solution.
This is a case of correctly diagnosing the problem - but not actually having a real solution