@DrYohanJohn
Thanks for this really excellent summary. You nailed so many great points here.

(b/c the thread was broken, I’ll comment at the top).

One idea from this book that I found particularly thought provoking was Tychonic principle: the idea that the data required to push science forward is exceedingly difficult and tedious to collect. What then might possibly motivate scientists to do such work? It’s how we’ve set up the scientific enterprise: to prioritize and reward the acquisition of difficult to collect data.

That idea both resonated with me and haunted me at the same time. Resonated because yes, there’s truth to it - data collection is tedious and unless we prioritize and reward it, no one will do that really, really hard work. Haunted because I worry that the cost of that system is that sometimes not enough thought is given to considering the data that’s most important to collect (because who knows?)

Which leads to another big idea that I found haunting: that scientist can make science work but no one can explain how it works (neither scientists nor philosophers nor historians). Haunting because: if we are concerned it’s not working, how do we diagnose and intervene in a way that doesn’t do more damage than good?

Hauntings are good, I think. It’s a really thought provoking and accessible book. I recommend anyone in the headspace for that type of contemplation.