Nullius in Verba Episode 78: Dissensio - I
Apr 4, 2026
A lively examination of why disagreement matters in science. They explore criticism as intellectual practice, its emotional and social costs, and when to engage or step back. Topics include peer disagreement puzzles, paradigm clashes, replication debates, manufactured doubt, and how incentives and drama shape unresolved controversies.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Criticism Is The Engine Of Scientific Progress
- Disagreement is central to rational discussion and scientific progress as Plato and Popper argue that criticism frees us from false beliefs.
- Daniël Lakens quotes Popper: stating problems clearly and trying to overthrow our own solutions fosters growth and objectivity.
Ask For Feedback Then Don’t Defend Yourself
- Do solicit and receive criticism deliberately by creating spaces where people can voice feedback without immediate defense.
- Daniël describes a department head using anonymous 360 evaluations and asking staff to only say "thank you" when given critique.
Pluralism Generates Ideas While Refutation Strengthens Them
- Pluralism and adversarial testing both improve science: Feyerabend stresses welcoming alternative views; Popper emphasizes trying to overthrow our own solutions.
- Smriti and Daniël contrast generating novel ideas with subjecting theories to refutation as complementary functions.
