Obviously, real evaluation is not binary, but yes, the main point of peer review is for an expert without a conflict of interest to evaluate the work so that we can know what to build on as we move forward.
Science is a bunch of technologies we've developed to help us not fool ourselves (as a community). True peer review is one of the best.
As we've all talked about endlessly, the encoding by the fact that it's been published in a journal is a poor proxy for the real peer review.
We need peer review because none of us are experts in everything, but unless we want to live in ever more siloed ivory towers with no meaningful consequences, we will need to integrate our work with work from fields that we are not experts in. Thus, we need peer review to determine the quality of that work and whether it is a foundation on which to build or not.
Redish Lab
npub16j…cknep
2024-06-29 19:30:34 UTC
in reply to nevent1q…yaz4
Author Public Key
npub16jr6tn76pth8u36wjh0j09zmed42aue7slg8er9nw3qtl6wuh3us8cknepPublished at
2024-06-29 19:30:34 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "3f100fa113e55ab5d456da58b23d811cbfec13bd71f9127f819cbf64146da5ba",
"pubkey": "d487a5cfda0aee7e474e95df27945bcb6aaef33e87d07c8cb37440bfe9dcbc79",
"created_at": 1719689434,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"d487a5cfda0aee7e474e95df27945bcb6aaef33e87d07c8cb37440bfe9dcbc79"
],
[
"p",
"079c46cc2ee94d7772f583b38be00e2138a504acf4d19ff3e152d6da43e5f927"
],
[
"p",
"78d3821b280ffab889e61fb6a5e82ce45828daa3bbe259f25b4bd927006bf576"
],
[
"p",
"353a05b7c6ec6bdd1ed198ec01b0a80edf830f670eca07cd29ca6ebd573876cc"
],
[
"e",
"3812c0009e3c9503f47562b297e2c693fa84814fbd478db51282cebd6455b685",
"",
"root"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://neuromatch.social/@adredish/112701566808045202",
"web"
],
[
"e",
"cdc279754cefd432ebb9c003f3c9e5d076ec8f956be59c7e5c1ce3d3fbd0e6c3",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"ae2996b7856b79f43117388762ec45a556e8a844db6b739fb25792f41fed6923"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://neuromatch.social/users/adredish/statuses/112701566808045202",
"activitypub"
],
[
"L",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"l",
"pink.momostr.activitypub:https://neuromatch.social/users/adredish/statuses/112701566808045202",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"expiration",
"1722281437"
]
],
"content": "Obviously, real evaluation is not binary, but yes, the main point of peer review is for an expert without a conflict of interest to evaluate the work so that we can know what to build on as we move forward.\n\nScience is a bunch of technologies we've developed to help us not fool ourselves (as a community). True peer review is one of the best.\n\nAs we've all talked about endlessly, the encoding by the fact that it's been published in a journal is a poor proxy for the real peer review. \n\nWe need peer review because none of us are experts in everything, but unless we want to live in ever more siloed ivory towers with no meaningful consequences, we will need to integrate our work with work from fields that we are not experts in. Thus, we need peer review to determine the quality of that work and whether it is a foundation on which to build or not.",
"sig": "f78d332975d20deddc7555fc0a70d3aceb3927ecf983e4cc86ddfc0d2323da2ff27f0b3aa68376ab2c1906eb12f9f94c8cc691cd487c46cf8fdd193fa0fa0793"
}