Online:
Visits:
Stories:
Profile image
By Sebastian Clouth
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

Dangers of Believing Too Much in Science, Explained by Scientists

Tuesday, February 4, 2014 15:31
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

Some of the great minds that shaped the laws of science warn us not to be limited by those laws. (Shutterstock*)

Many of the scientists who helped establish the widely accepted scientific theories and laws have warned future scientists not to be limited by their work. They also note that many of the greatest discoveries were ridiculed at first, as they stood in opposition to preconceived notions. 

Here are 17 insights from some of the greatest minds of science. 

 

1. The Benefits of Being Scoffed At

Rejoice when other scientists do not believe what you know to be true. It will give you extra time to work on it in peace. When they start claiming that they have discovered it before you, look for a new project.

—Efraim Racker, in “Resolution and Reconstitution of Biological Pathways from 1919 to 1984,” published in Federation Proceedings in 1983.

Efraim Racker (1913–1991) was a biochemist. He is known for his work on discovering the mechanism of the synthesis of ATP, a molecule used for transporting energy within cells in organisms.

 

2. Scientists Should Let Go of Preconceived Notions

You are urgently warned against allowing yourself to be influenced in any way by theories or by other preconceived notions in the observation of phenomena, the performance of analyses and other determinations.

—Emil Hermann Fischer, as quoted by M. Bergmann in “Das Buch der Grosse Chemiker” and translated by Joseph S. Froton in “Contrasts in Scientific Style: Research Groups in the Chemical and Biomedical Sciences.”

Emil Hermann Fischer (1852–1919) was a chemist. He received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1902 “in recognition of the extraordinary services he has rendered by his work on sugar and purine syntheses,” according to the Nobel Prize website. Fischer is also known for having developed the Fischer projection, a way to draw two-dimensional representations of structures of organic molecules.


Hermann Emil Fischer ca. 1895. (Paul Gericke)

 

3. Strong Resistance to New Ideas

The mind likes a strange idea as little as the body likes a strange protein, and resists it with a similar energy. It would not perhaps be too fanciful to say that a new idea is the most quickly acting antigen known to science. If we watch ourselves honestly, we shall often find that we have begun to argue against a new idea even before it has been completely stated. I have no doubt that that last sentence has already met with repudiation—and shown how quickly the defense mechanism gets to work.

—Wilfred Trotter, in ‘The Collected Papers of Wilfred Trotter F.R.S.,’ published in 1941.

Wilfred Trotter (1872–1939) was a surgeon and social psychologist.

 

4. Just Because It Can’t Easily Be Measured, Doesn’t Mean It Doesn’t Exist

The first step is to measure whatever can easily be measured. This is OK as far as it goes. The second step is to disregard that which can’t be easily measured or to give it an arbitrary quantitative value. This is artificial and misleading. The third step is to presume that what can’t be measured easily really isn’t important. This is blindness. The fourth step is to say that what can’t be easily measured really doesn’t exist. This is suicide.

–Charles Handy, Economist and organizational behaviorist, in his book ‘The Empty Raincoat: Making Sense of the Future’


Shutterstock

 

5. Physical ‘Laws’ May Change

We have no right to assume that any physical laws exist, or if they have existed up to now, that they will continue to exist in a similar manner in future. It is perfectly conceivable that one fine day Nature should cause an unexpected event to occur which would baffle us all; and if this were to happen we would be powerless to make any objection, even if the result would be that, in spite of our endeavors, we should fail to introduce order into the resulting confusion. In such an event, the only course open to science would be to declare itself bankrupt. 

—Max Planck, in his book The Universe in the Light of Modern Physics, translated by W. H. Johnston.

Max Planck is regarded as one of the founders of quantum mechanics. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1918 for “the services he rendered to the advancement of Physics by his discovery of energy quanta.”

Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.

—Max Planck, in his book ‘Where Is Science Going?’ translated by James Murphy.


German physicist Max Planck ca. 1930 (Wikimedia Commons)

 

6. Science ‘Another Form of Religion’?

We need not wait for science to give us permission to do the uncommon or go beyond what we have been told is possible. If we do, we make science another form of religion. We should be mavericks; we should practice doing the extraordinary.

—Joe Dispenza, in his book ‘Evolve Your Brain: The Science of Changing Your Mind’

Joe Dispenza is a neuroscientist and chiropractor. He is one of the scientists featured in the film What the Bleep Do We Know!?, which includes documentary-style interviews. Dispenza suffered from fractures to his vertebrae due to a car accident, and doctors said that the only way he could walk again would be to have an operation. But he decided against the operation, believing that he could heal himself using willpower. He was able to walk again three months later.

 

7. What May Now Seem Ridiculous Could Be the Future of Science

I have no doubt that in reality the future will be vastly more surprising than anything I can imagine. Now my own suspicion is that the universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose.

—J.B.S. Haldane, in his book ‘Possible Worlds and Other Papers’

J.B.S. Haldane was a biologist. He was one of the founders of population genetics. He also derived the Briggs–Haldane equation with G.E. Briggs to describe enzyme kinetics.

Continue reading here

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.