Disagreement is really important in science. If no-one disagrees then you don’t make any progress, you just stick with the same old ideas. But, when there is a disagreement, both scientists try to figure out a way to prove their idea is the best. If they come up with the right experiment, it will prove them to be right or wrong, and once you have the proof that is it. There is no disagreement any more because in science you can’t ignore the proof even if you preferred a different idea before.
That happens very often! I think it does both. It’s very motivating to have someone else’s input and opinion on my work, because they bring new ideas and perspectives that by myself I didn’t think about. It helps seeing things from a different angle, which is great. We can talk about why they don’t agree with my work, and if they tell me about something I didn’t know before, than it’s great because I learnt something new! If they tell me they disagree because I made a sign mistake, then it’s a bit embarrassing, but at least they helped fixing it so I can go forward!
The great thing about science is that it’s not about opinions, it’s about facts and experiments and proofs in the end, and it’s true regardless of my personal opinion, so I always try to focus on what I learn about how nature works, which is always fascinating and motivating!
Yes, definitely! Science only makes progress by people asking difficult questions and trying to poke holes in existing measurements or theories. Everyone is trying to get a little bit closer to the underlying truth so if someone disagrees then it may make you re-think what you have done which could lead you to finding some mistake. However, there is no shame in this, it is simply part of the natural process of research. Alternatively, you might perform many cross-checks of the result and find that you still get the same answer. In this case, you can go back to the other person and present even stronger evidence to support your conclusion. In this case it might be them that has to change their theory.
Comments