Maybe you feel just like our genius from last week. You work until you have developed a machine or technique that is able to take you one step further than what your bare eye can see, like a microscope.
Yet what if you DIDN’t know that such an instrument as the microscope exists?
What if you DIDN’T know that there is a technique that allows you to see beyond the resolution of a magnifying glass?
Yet what if the microscope has not yet been invented?
How would you come to a better understanding of your sample then?
Or would you even bother to look for ways to improve your understanding, unaware of that you only see a limited picture of the life forms that actually are present in your sample by the method you presently use?
Academic ethics, integrity of science, corporate ethics –“peer review”
It is the same with science: if science is unaware of that things exist that are not yet proven, and if no curious genius designs a machine to prove the things he considers might probably exist, how can he prove that they in fact do exist? This is the dilemma of science and always has been: it is only as accurate as the equipment it has at its disposal.
Therefore, the experiment of our curious genius trying to prove his wild advanced theories using only available equipment might as well fail to yield a positive answer.
You simply won’t see bacteria with the bare eye.
Our genius could be satisfied with this, having tried to prove his idea in a scientifically sound manner. Or he might wonder on about what else he could try to prove his ‘gut feeling’. And eventually come up with a machine advanced and novel enough to prove his point right.
But this may take time, and until this new-invention-to-come yields first results that are reliable even more time will pass. So; how long will it take to get any of those results through the established scientific maze of criticism and into the public media? I hope I will live to tel (-;
Future scientific work
Today, many of these machines which can reliably measure non-material processes still have to be developed. It is like we are working with our bare eyes, and some have a magnifying glass. The microscope to see the greater context is just being developed. And imagine what we will learn once the electron microscope-equivalent has been invented! I expect that we will gain amazing insights in many more and fascinating details about the workings of the universe, consciousness and alternative ways of healing within the next decades. And that we will be able to scientifically prove more of what is going on.
Here again the titles of the mini series:
1) A short introduction to today’s (alternative) medicine world (16 December)
2) A little historic excursion – How science gained influence ( 1 January)
3) Science today and where today’s scientific methods fall short (7 January)
4) Expand your vision (21 January)
5) Scientific dilemma (TODAY)
6) Future scientific work and studies available today (28 January)
http://philosophyofscienceportal.blogspot.nl/2010/04/academic-ethics-integrity-of-science.html