Jim: > Science, as I understand it (and being an economist, I'm not > a scientist), tries to come to a general agreement about > "truth" via replication, logical examination, etc. But it > has respect for deviants who aren't too far away from the > mainstream's "research project." Those deviants who deviate > "too much" from the mainstream (as "plate tectonics" did until > only a few years ago) suffer professional costs. But science, when > practiced well, can be opened up to such deviantideas, however.
I am not so sure about this either Jim. Consider Lebesque, for example, the father of measure theory. Although today every single mathematics student has to learn his measure and integration, he was denied his PhD because of his idea of integration, which later revolutionized mathematics, both pure and applied. You suffer professional costs everywhere, if you deviate from the mainstream to the extent that what you do threatens it. Best, Sabri
