Science advances
Why does science advance one funeral at a time?
Historically, men have had the power to shape the culture of science and how it advances, one theory supplanting another in a hierarchy of ideas with one winner and a long list of losers. Having received acceptance of an idea, the incumbent theorist fears being rendered obsolete and so smothers any attempt to advance from the sedentary position of the status quo baseline. Once you get to the top of the ladder, make sure to kick it away so no one can follow. In such a system, death is necessary for science to advance.
Besides being terribly inefficient, this type of annihilative progress stymies interdisciplinary innovation and promotes academic silos. Consider an alternative approach. Look for truth to admire in the contributions of others, and be the glue that connects their ideas in a way that does not diminish but rather elevates. Recognizing the value of others’ ideas and respecting them enough to incorporate their truth is faster than seeking to crush the validity of another’s contribution at the cost of truth. Instead of debating which single person is the most correct, consider how each relevant theorist is likely to be correct in some way.
Not everything is about the patriarchy, but the way science advances definitely is. Not everything is about the moral corruption of capitalism, but lethargy in academia undeniably profits those comfortable with their incumbency. Today the slow crawl of scientific progress sheds truth like scales as it lumbers forward encumbered by the weight of ego. Our alternative is to appreciate the beauty of others’ work, and try to build from truth rather than destroy for glory. Be the glue not the conqueror.
Shouldn’t science advance one collaboration at a time?
Does Science Advance One Funeral at a Time?
