Scientists tend to have what I call a reality filter. A reality filter is a set of habits that tends to prevent a person from receiving observations or analysis or facts that contradict his worldview, while allowing the reception of observations or analysis or facts consistent with his worldview.
Let's look at a hypothetical case of how such reality filtering works, considering the many ways that a Professor Smith excludes observations that conflict with his belief system, using his power as an editor, a peer-reviewer, an authority to be quoted, and a person yielding power in various ways.
Researcher #1: Here is my careful set of observations of a truly baffling spooky phenomenon....
Professor Smith: We don't talk about stuff like that in this journal, so I recommend non-publication.
Researcher #2: So what do you think of out-of-body experiences and reports of seeing apparitions?
Professor Smith: They must just be hallucinations.
Researcher #2: Have you studied them in any depth?
Professor Smith: I don't study that kind of spooky stuff. I leave that to what I call "fringe" researchers.
Researcher #3: I've written a paper drawing conclusions just like those you have made.
Professor Smith: Great, I'll give you a laudatory quote you can use for your press release!
Researcher #4: Here's a paper on a topic you research, but drawing conclusions radically different from yours.
Professor Smith: I don't think we need any more papers on this topic right now.
Researcher #5: Here's my 500-page book challenging the dogmas typically taught by professors such as you. Can you read it and provide a "blurb"?
Professor Smith: That would be a waste of time, because you're not a professor.
Researcher #5: But I treat some of these topics much more deeply than you have ever have done in your writings.
Professor Smith: That doesn't matter.
Reporter #1: What is your comment on the new paper of Professor Jones offering a new theory challenging the conclusions of scientists such as you?
Professor Smith: I am not impressed.
Reporter #1: Did you read his paper and his other papers on his theory?
Professor Smith: I am a busy professor. I don't have time for "fringe studies."
Professor #1: So we have two candidates to be a new professor in our department. There's that "maverick" contrarian independent thinker and that guy who seems to always parrot what we say.
Professor Smith: That's a "no brainer." Go with the "team player" so we can maintain smooth team dynamics. Nobody likes it when people are having loud arguments.
Student #1: Why did you give a C- grade to my original 50-page term paper, when my friend got an A+ grade on his 20-page rehash rush job paper?
Professor Smith: You had too much "out of the box" and "fringe" stuff. It's risky to "go contrarian." Remember, always respect the views of your superiors.
Student #2: Why doesn't your class mention any of the strange spooky things that scientists can't explain?
Professor Smith: Professors like me have a rule you might call "nothing fringe" or "nothing spooky." I wouldn't want to get in trouble with the other professors in my department.
Researcher #6: I made some important observations as part of our scientific experiment, but you didn't even mention them in the paper.
Professor Smith: Remember, the typical scientific paper is a particular storyline, and your observations did not fit in with the storyline. It's harder for papers with "clashing storylines" to get published.
Researcher #7: Here's my new book making claims just like the ones you keep making.
Professor Smith: Great, I'll write a nice little "blurb" line, like saying, "This is a very important contribution of great insight."
Researcher #8: Here's my new book making a case against the ossified orthodoxy of today's scientists. It includes hundreds of fascinating relevant observations.
Professor Smith: What makes you think I have time to read "heretic" writings?
Researcher #9: We did nine experiments trying to show some effect in the brain. One showed the effect with marginal significance, and the others failed to show any such effect. What should we do?
Professor Smith: The answer is obvious. The eight experiments that failed go into our file drawer, and the one success gets written up as a scientific paper.
Reporter #2: What is your comment on those strange new UFO sightings everyone is talking about?
Professor Smith: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Reporter #2: Have you studied those sightings?
Professor Smith: No, I was just quoting a line that professors like to quote when they are asked about something spooky.
Student #7: Professor, three in our class including me saw an apparition of that student who died in a car crash.
Professor Smith: You must all be liars. Don't spread such stories.
Student #3: Professor, I just read a paper saying that during DNA transcription, cells actually proofread their results, to reduce copying errors. And I read of some human protein molecules with thousands of amino acids that have to be in just the right sequence before the molecule is functional. How could things so fantastically complex and fine-tuned have arisen through Darwinian processes?
Professor Smith: I need not delve into that, because as we professors like to say, "The answer is always Darwin."
No comments:
Post a Comment