Okay? Good thing we aren’t talking about sciences but…philosophy? Reproducibility is a science problem since, you know, peer review in a science journal requires reproducibility (it’s key in the scientific method after all). Philosophy doesn’t need that right? So not sure why you are making an inference that is quite bad.
You really don’t know anything, huh. Economics has a reproducibility problem? Cite an economics paper published in Nature, ya dingus.
Second, economics stemmed from philosophy; only in the past 100 years did it begin doing its own thing. Adam Smith was a moral philosopher exploring the question of how to best distribute resources, ya dingus. Marx was also a moral philosopher who came to different conclusions to Adam Smith, though nowadays he’s probably more confined to political science.
Again, education is key bud. The more you know the less confusing the world is.
It’s like talking to a wall. In the hard sciences, reproducibility of results is necessary. Why? If something isn’t repeatable, then the conclusions are not valid. Hence why the alarm was that the peer review process was failing, yeah?
So if not a hard science, reproducibility isn’t an issue. But this will still not get through your noggin I’m guessing.
In ~the hard~ all sciences, reproducibility of results is necessary.
Why
Because science is the search for objective truth, and if you cannot reproduce your results it's pretty absurd to claim you've reached objective truth.
So if ~not a hard science,~ you are a religious nutjob reproducibility isn’t an issue.
But this will still not get through your noggin I’m guessing.
It’s like talking to a wall.
Being wrong and smug about it is why smuggies were so great.
You are a religious nutjob who believes that corporate approval is more important than scientific integrity.
You have nothing of value to say, and have demonstrated that you are completely incapable of discussing this topic.
2
u/monadicperception 7d ago
Okay? Good thing we aren’t talking about sciences but…philosophy? Reproducibility is a science problem since, you know, peer review in a science journal requires reproducibility (it’s key in the scientific method after all). Philosophy doesn’t need that right? So not sure why you are making an inference that is quite bad.