Scientific Orthodoxy

"You can break a man's skull. You can arrest him. You can throw him into a dungeon. But how do you control what's up here? How do you fight an idea?
--Sextus (Bun-Hur)

Many salient points made by Judge Nap here, including the observation that in a free society, people are free to reject scientific orthodoxy in favor of unorthodox views. People do so, of course, to their own peril.

There are many who associate scientific findings with finality. But, as Thomas Kuhn and others have observed, science is rarely final. In fact, as support builds for a particular scientific view, it is more likely to become distorted, rigid, and wrong. Unorthodox thinking is required to falsify the dominant coalition's paradigm and further advance what is known.

The state commonly embraces scientific orthodoxy because it is a means of capturing more political power. It should be no surprise that scientists and other intellectuals of the orthodox often partner with government. We have seen this in the realm of climate and recently in the realm of vaccinations. Chances of mischief increase as scientists bend the truth for their statist collaborators.

By endorsing scientific orthodoxy, government uses its coercive power to force it upon those who intellectually reject it. Science becomes a mechanism for one group to force its views on others.

Strong minds do not yield to such coercion.