>that thinks that good intentions are a substitute for philosophic rigor.
On the contrary, I think that scientific rigor is a good substitute for the free market when it comes to profiting from scientific advances. You can argue that the system in place is flawed and politically biased and perhaps it is, but the alternative is to treat cancer treatments and heart medication the same as vitamins and crystal therapy.
What profound innovations are being held back because of people like myself who demand that certain claims meet a standard of proof before hitting the market?
On the contrary, I think that scientific rigor is a good substitute for the free market when it comes to profiting from scientific advances. You can argue that the system in place is flawed and politically biased and perhaps it is, but the alternative is to treat cancer treatments and heart medication the same as vitamins and crystal therapy.
What profound innovations are being held back because of people like myself who demand that certain claims meet a standard of proof before hitting the market?