Forecast.
In science, and to a lesser expert in other
disciplines, it is useful to make predictions.
In 2012, I wrote to 38 Engineering students in Trinity College,
Cambridge, the most scientific college in Cambridge.
This is what I wrote; http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/wxyz.pdf
. As I predicted, none of the students responded in any way. I made that
prediction in 1996. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/28anom.htm
; “Those students who studied, learned, and passed exams in the IEE's [or a
school or college’s] static knowledge base developed subject loyalty and also a
vested interest in its maintenance and defence against new knowledge.”
Before the article called "The Wakefield Experiment"
was published in April 2013, I predicted that no relevant professor would make
any comment whatsoever. Further, I predicted that no journalist would touch the
subject. I am assembling my approach to professors and journalists here .
As to Sociology of Science, Philosophy of Science, History of
Science, none of those professionally active in any of those fields today will
absorb the significance of this experiment.
Ivor Catt 27 March 2012
What is interesting is that we will find that as
well as professional scientists and science journalists, those who practice Sociology of
Science, Philosophy of Science, History of Science, do not believe in the
possibility of Paradigm
Shift . "The Wakefield
Experiment" only hints at Paradigm Shift , but
that is enough to rule it out of court among professionals. The last paradigm
shifts were phlogiston
and caloric , 200
years ago. A professional needs to believe that he is looking
at crank science, and his reputation must not be sullied by getting involved in
it. He knows that the likelihood of another paradigm shift is minimal. He only
has to read the title of "The
Wakefield Experiment" .
"Scientists move in tight formation"
. This includes their fellow-travellers.
We should be able to develop the idea of Whig History , and find
that today professionals limit themselves to Whig Sociology of Science, Whig
Philosophy of Science, and Whig History of Science. Since they know T S
Kuhn , this must be particularly difficult for the Sociologists of Science.
They must believe that Kuhn only relates to past science.
Ivor Catt 27 March
2013 bis.