And you’d say that some brilliant student project isn’t. Publication is not the definition of science. Does the work have to be correct to be science? No. Most science is eventually shown to be incorrect in some way. It’s the search for answers that defines science not some journal that openly exploits the people who are searching.
Science is pushing the bounds of human knowledge. Science is only science if it propagates, otherwise it’s just someone’s discovery. Science has to be built upon, even if it’s disproven, that means it was documented well enough to be built upon. That’s not to say everything that’s disproven is science, because crackpot theories don’t often push the bounds of human knowledge.
I hope the brilliant students get their knowledge out there. (But that is unfortunately hard in academia. Despite us living in what should be a post knowledge scarcity society, we clearly aren’t.)
By that logic you’d say that dianetics counts as science? Lmao
And you’d say that some brilliant student project isn’t. Publication is not the definition of science. Does the work have to be correct to be science? No. Most science is eventually shown to be incorrect in some way. It’s the search for answers that defines science not some journal that openly exploits the people who are searching.
Science is pushing the bounds of human knowledge. Science is only science if it propagates, otherwise it’s just someone’s discovery. Science has to be built upon, even if it’s disproven, that means it was documented well enough to be built upon. That’s not to say everything that’s disproven is science, because crackpot theories don’t often push the bounds of human knowledge.
I hope the brilliant students get their knowledge out there. (But that is unfortunately hard in academia. Despite us living in what should be a post knowledge scarcity society, we clearly aren’t.)