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

> Has that maybe been true since the beginning of 'natural philosophy'?

Unlikely. In its infancy, science -- aka "Natural Philosophy" as it was called at the time -- had to establish its credibility. It did so by delivering results.



I think most of the science back then was really bad, we just don't talk about it, which is exactly the parent post's point.


Alchemy was part of natural philosophy as well though.


Maybe only one person in ten delivered results - then you'd have both results and 90% crud.


And in the same way, a lot of science done and published in the last 25 years has shown real technological improvement in the world around us.


Is that not mostly engineering? Refinement of existing hard science?




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

Search: