TLDR: You are right, Pat, yet John's path is the one for the truly curious to take.
That's a good observation, Pat, but John's point remains. If one takes the conformist path, that is, goes with the flow, little to nothing will be challenged, and little to nothing will be gained. But going against the flow, the possibilities of newness are much greater. Furthermore, ostensible discoveries going against the flow will ALWAYS be challenged by the guardians of the status quo, and thus, if these new ideas are poorly founded, they will collapse from their own weakness. Only strong ideas will be able to withstand the assault from the Establishment, and thus we will grow.
Isn't seeking novelty as much of a bias as seeking conformity? Seeking accuracy seems better.
TLDR: You are right, Pat, yet John's path is the one for the truly curious to take.
That's a good observation, Pat, but John's point remains. If one takes the conformist path, that is, goes with the flow, little to nothing will be challenged, and little to nothing will be gained. But going against the flow, the possibilities of newness are much greater. Furthermore, ostensible discoveries going against the flow will ALWAYS be challenged by the guardians of the status quo, and thus, if these new ideas are poorly founded, they will collapse from their own weakness. Only strong ideas will be able to withstand the assault from the Establishment, and thus we will grow.