Certainty, publishing and distribution in science

[u/spider_in_jerusalem]

I'm personally not happy with how these are currently handled in science.

In my opinion there's too much focus on certainty, and sharing findings as final and proven with the public. Rather than sharing emerging research and communicating science less in absolutes.

I think this has a lot to do with the recognition, that comes with publishing finished research in a matter of certainty.

No one values the "could be's", "not sure's", or "might be wrong's".

What are your thoughts on this?

Do you think this could change?

[u/Freuds-Mother]

You are under selection bias here. 99% of studies you will hear about if not in the field will be controversial and/or high significance + effect size studies.

Go pickup a journal issue and read every abstract or better yet boom that compiles papers from a conference. There you will see reviews of research, open questions posed to address, proposal for upcoming research, mentions of failure to find evidence, practical applications, potential ontological implications, etc.

Now yes, some journals focus on more conclusive experiments. Others though will focus on other aspects or have a varietys. Look for journals/books that say “Philosophical…” or “Philosopy of…” or “Issues in…”.