Ken Rudich
Jul 24, 2017 · 1 min read

The malleability of any given theory is somewhat dependent on the empirical evidence behind it.

If I theorize that repeatedly hitting your head against a brick wall will do more harm to you than it will the brick wall, there’s plenty of empirical evidence to support this theory. This is where “scientists” and “amateur scientists” often part company. One depends on the rigors of scientific discovery — or the best known science at the time — and the other develops opinion based on their limited sphere of experience and/or their own personal lens.

At the same time, absolute truth can be elusive in either case, and there is the element of most things being dynamic in nature. Nonetheless, there also is an appreciable difference in the reliability factor offered by a real scientist versus that of an amateur.

These distinctions are not unimportant, though they seem increasingly overlooked in our contemporary society.