Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> should we not appeal to physicists?

No, we should not because there is no reason to believe that laws of physics are in any way dependent on physicists. Science is based on theories producing verifiable predictions, not "votes" cast through articles.

Yes, if you need to get something done, you hire people with relevant knowledge, skills and experience. But scientific theories should be completely inter-subjective and work the same for everyone.



So, you are suggesting that if hundreds of physicists do various experiments on some property of gravity, say, the speed of propagation of gravity, starting with Urbain Le Verrier in 1859, and they publish these experiments, and their results, in peer reviewed journals, and over 150 years of extremely competent physicists, each trying to make their reputation by trying to disprove the commonly held theory (that it occurs at the speed of light), none of them come up with any answer other than, gravity propagates at the speed of light - that you don't believe we should, as a society, and individuals, subscribe to this notion, because all of these experts have found it to be true and told us it is the case?

After all, there is no way for you or I to determine the speed of propagation of gravity, so what choice do we have other than to rely on other's authority?


And yet appeal to authority remains a fallacy, and it is possible for social proof to fail. Some people would like to sweep this paradox under the rug, but it's not that simple. Not so long ago, a similar survey of published authorities as the OP's would have yielded results we today would consider preposterous.

History and philosophy have much to teach us here, for example about the perils of overconfidence.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: