If you get science by the pockets, their hearts and minds will follow. On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Bob Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
> Peter and Alain-- > > I agree that Kuhn would have a field day. However, I do not think he > would agree with Rossi apparent theory that commercializing a new > technology will lead to better research and behavior of scientists. We > will see. > > Bob Cook > > *From:* Peter Gluck <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Wednesday, December 23, 2015 1:26 AM > *To:* VORTEX <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Essay: The cold fusion horizon > > Mon cher Alain, > > Wouldn't you have the kindness to make an EGO OUT guest editorial > why not for NOEL, from these ideas a bit developed/ > Peter > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 11:11 PM, Alain Sepeda <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Clearly psychology of groups, epistemology, sociology, ethnology of >> science, will consider Cold Fusion fiasco as a key event in history, like >> the story of germs, og geocentrisms, of Malthusianism, of creationism, and >> of some current stories (maybe correlated). >> >> If you (re-)read the book "Excess Heat" by Charles Beaudette, you will >> clearly see that logic, epistemology, psychology, are key competence to >> unlock the truth there. >> The importance of Baltimore, the reputation trap, the anti-Popperian love >> of theory, the tribe battles, the hierarchy in sciences (Nuclear >> Physics>Theretical Physics> Material >> physics>chemistry>electrchemistry>biochemistry>biology, low compexity->> >> high complexity), are phenomenon to consider in a human science perspective. >> >> I always cite Roland Benabou because his theory of Groupthink explains >> the "trap" in the "reputation trap", and because it explains the increase >> of violence when evidence grows against the consensus. >> >> The notion of Black Swan is interesting but hid the concept of "Pink >> Flamingo" more appropriate to Cold Fusion... >> when something is seen since long (not a black swan) but not considered >> (not white swan) because of huge cognitive opposition and associate >> prejudices. >> >> Then I remember the work of Kuhn which explained that it happens all the >> time and that history is rewritten by the losers who say the mainstream >> science did the job perfectly, despite the annoyance of few irresponsible >> maverick. >> >> So it is hopeless... >> >> 2015-12-22 21:12 GMT+01:00 Eric Walker <[email protected]>: >> >>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> https://aeon.co/essays/why-do-scientists-dismiss-the-possibility-of-cold-fusion >>>> >>> >>> I like the essay by Huw Price a lot. He has a great attitude. >>> Philosophers of science and sociologists are in a good position to light a >>> fire under intransigent cliques in the physical sciences. Someone like >>> Kuhn would have a field day with what's going on right now. >>> >>> I think the reference to Lundin's and Lidgren's paper was unfortunate >>> and could become a distraction for Price later on in making his general >>> point. >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> >> >> > > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >
