Sigh, why does HN keep picking these editorialized articles up? I honestly expect the community to flag this as clickbait.
We have new evidence that invalidates our previous hypotheses, so we adjust course and keep going. “We all” didn’t believe a “myth about depression.” We believed that scientific findings combined with some relevant studies, experiments and feedback loops would yield a step in the right direction. We accept that the scientific method isn’t infallible.
I don’t understand what people are after. The further along we get in our exploration the more hypotheses we’ll invalidate. Which is to be expected. I would rather be outraged at ignorance than outraged at new knowledge that contradicts the old.
We have new evidence that invalidates our previous hypotheses, so we adjust course and keep going. “We all” didn’t believe a “myth about depression.” We believed that scientific findings combined with some relevant studies, experiments and feedback loops would yield a step in the right direction. We accept that the scientific method isn’t infallible.
I don’t understand what people are after. The further along we get in our exploration the more hypotheses we’ll invalidate. Which is to be expected. I would rather be outraged at ignorance than outraged at new knowledge that contradicts the old.