101
General Science / Re: The Causes of Evil?
« on: 14/01/2013 14:56:17 »An alternative way of looking at this is that we all make mistakes, and sometimes overlook something obvious (me included!). I actually like people to quickly point out errors or omissions in my work, even though I wouldn't go so far as to say I "enjoy" it! ............................................ But this may be a good training ground for new researchers, and may reduce the cost of science, overall.
I, too, welcome my work being questioned so long as the questions are friendly in intention. Before a paper ever goes out, it is handed round to professors and colleagues who then, hopefully, pick up on all the relevant points that need to be made. What need, therefore, to duplicate the process and formalize it such that it actually provides the upper echelons of the scientific establishment with the opportunity to prevent publication of what they do not like?.
Also, the peer review system robs scientists themselves of the chance to make up their own minds as to the value of published work. Everyone is capable of developing their critical faculties such that they can pick out the fraudulent from the genuine. However, if they are not allowed to develop that faculty, they remain ever at the mercy of frauds and tricksters. One could, therefore, argue that the peer review system actually opens the door to more fraud.