|
|
 Originally Posted by wufwugy
The scientific community is arguably the best example in existence of markets at work. It's totally decentralized, totally open to any individuals and any companies. Its robustness comes from the peer review. Businesses in a market get their robustness from a similar thing to peer review: choice of consumers.
Imagine how swiftly the scientific community would be destroyed if government intervened. If government regulated the peer review process, we could kiss the whole thing goodbye.
What are your thoughts on the patent office, NSF, FDA, etc.?
It seems to me that these are government regulatory systems which are intended to act as another layer of peer review.
Peer review is great when it works, but there are, sadly, just as many lazy people, liars and hacks in the scientific community as anywhere else. There are too many examples of outright fraudulent claims which have passed through multiple layers of peer review. History has taught us over and over again that a policy of skepticism is always best.
|
Reply With Quote