What if Science Isn’t About Truth After All?

What if Science Isn’t About Truth After All?

When I started out, I believed research was about uncovering some objective reality. Something we’re all moving toward, together.

But over the years, I’ve let go of that belief. Not out of cynicism, but because I’ve seen how science actually works.

We don’t just ask what is “true or valid.”

Truth and validity is just the beginning.

Seeking truth is challenging. We really often don’t know what “truth is.”

We have to remember the system managed by imperfectly rational humans.

But, let’s not just blame the people involved. They are doing their best.

We often all are. And, we often research things that are challenging.

Science and research is just hard.

There are tools, like replication and retesting, but it is only the start.

We also have to ask:

- What will reviewers like?

- What will get published?

- What will get cited, shared, or funded?

What makes it through isn’t always just truth, as I once understood.

It’s what feels persuasive, legible, beautiful.

Strange ideas, messy ideas, uncomfortable ideas? They rarely survive the filter.

We don’t have good universal definitions of what is persuasive or beautiful.

And this isn’t just a social science problem.

It’s science, full stop.

⸻

I have seen this firsthand with my own work.

I share publicly. I build tools.

I try to make research more human.

And most of the time?

Ignored. Discounted. Misunderstood.

I am not upset. This is not a rant. It’s just reality.

Look at my Youtube videos on R3ciprocity or these posts. Some work because some see their own humanity in it, and others barely get a few dozen views. I cannot predict what will be liked or who will pay attention.

Some warrant more attention than I would like. It is such a challenge to understand.

But I have realized: it’s not just me.

It’s the system.

The our realities are not only about facts.

It’s about style, status, and maybe who gets to speak.

Again, this is not a flaw. This is the reality of being a human being in a beautifully ambiguous and changing world.

⸻

So what’s left?

I don’t think the answer is perfect peer review. That is very difficult to do, and perhaps impossible.

I don’t think the answer is another ranking system.

The answer might be simpler:

• Let more voices in.

• Accept more ambiguity.

• Make the invisible visible.

Just have more ideas to be heard, no matter who they come from.

Maybe we create different ways to communicate become more acceptable?

Maybe we explore and play. Be silly.

I do see many positive things happening.

We need to figure out how to get people to continue to show up in science, and not give up.

Because science isn’t only about truth.

It’s about listening to others’ realities.

It is about not giving up in the face of the difficult uphill climb.

It’s about letting your voice sing in a way the shares truth, and what you love to explore.

Because it is so more than about truth.

It is about what is beautiful.