Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Getting Lost In the Scientific Woods Is Good For You

Posted by Soulskill on from the stay-out-of-the-real-woods-though-there-are-bears dept.

StartsWithABang writes: Wandering into the woods unprepared and without a plan sounds like a terrible idea. But if you're interested in scientific exploration at the frontiers, confronting the unknown with whatever you happen to have at your disposal, you have to take that risk. You have to be willing to take those steps. And you have to be okay with putting your best ideas out there — for all to see — knowing full well that you might get the entire thing wrong. Sometimes, that's indeed what happens. Some of the most revered and famous scientific minds in history confronted the great mysteries of nature, and came away having done nothing but set us back many years by leading the field down a blind alley. But other times, the greatest leaps forward in our understanding occur as a result. The article shares some notable examples, and explains why this is vital for scientific progress.

4 of 51 comments (clear)

  1. Obvious by Livius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's pretty much the definition of what science is. I'm not even clear what they think the alternative might be that would still qualify as science.

    And it works whether 'lost in the woods' is meant literally and metaphorically.

    1. Re:Obvious by HuguesT · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Most people think that scientist are strange people who have amassed a huge amount of very precise facts about an extremely specific field, some of which might be useful (facts or fields), but most of which are useless to the common people. The prototype is the scientist lady in the TV series "Bones". Scientists are assimilated to dorks who have not only not an ounce of creativity in them but also no social skills.

      In reality scientists need to be extremely creative in their work, and need to have the humility to accept that they know or understand only a tiny amount of the world that is around us. It is very easy and quick to tread into the complete unknown. We cannot at present even reconcile the most established theories we have about the way the world works (relativity and quantum mechanics).

  2. shooting through slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So now I first check the poster before the summary. There's a couple that can be safely ignored. Either because they don't have anything to say, or because they insist on summarising other people's work on an unreadable hipster website. NEXT!

  3. Huh? by argStyopa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This was so vapid and banal, I checked to see if the byline was Bennett Haselton.

    Then again, it wasn't a 6000-word opus, so I should have known better.

    Yes, it's intellectually useful to be challenged. And?

    --
    -Styopa