Yes, satisfying all, is almost impossible, but to an extent ,we can try our best to be coherent, and free of corrupt compromises, in our texts.
At the level of scientific research, I do not think so, since the theories and patents were not built if the researcher made concessions. At the professional and social levels, I agree with you.
Ogranized skepticism is one of the four principles of scientific inquiry. The other three are communism, disinterestedness, universalism.
To advance scientific knowledge, we should be skeptical and only accept the findings and their presentation if it meets the normative standards of the scientific community.
I learned that from Robert K. Merton’s landmark book of 1979, The Sociology of Science.
So the fair criticism is a fair game.
I think, that it is possible for us to get an agreeable middle ground, even though it is not the best point to satisfy all the interested parties.
Thanks Gulzar Shah
Your reply was wholesome and definitely fair criticisms are needed.
Middle ground can be an option provided there are no real compromises Claire Su-Yeon Park
Regards
Dear Sikandar Hayat Khan , thank you for this and other thought provoking questions in the times when it is so easy to fall in the trap of asking questions that cast wider net but produce less meaningful debate.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Moral Philosophy
- Free Will