Sherlock's Folly

There's a quote by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - author of Sherlock Holmes - that I frequently encounter on the internet.

Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.

It describes proof by elimination, which is a valid concept, so long as all possibilities can be enumerated. For instance, if there are three doors, and you've opened both 1 and 2, can you be sure that the prize is behind door number 3? If you're certain that one door must contain a prize, and there are no other doors, then yes. Otherwise, no.

This quote often shows up in science articles. It seems defensive; almost an admission of guilt. "Sure, the theory is based on all sorts of assumptions and ignores the contradictory evidence, but it's the best one we have." Call out a cherished theory as crap and the likely response is, "have you got a better theory?" No, and I don't have to. Is science supposed to be a process for finding the least wrong theory? It is not. The problem with taking the least wrong theory and treating it as a correct theory is that confirmation bias sets in. results find a way to conform to the consensus, or else they are discarded. Science is supposed to be an attempt to disprove theories, but that's not how careers are made. Discordant work is assumed to be shoddy work, particularly if it challenges the conclusions of those highly placed in the ivory tower.

The result is civilizational hubris. We just can't admit we don't have an answer. The people demand an answer. In more primitive times, lightning would have been a fearsome display. What is it? The priest answers, "It is the wrath of an angry god. Give me wealth, power, and perhaps some children to sacrifice, and I'll curry favor with the gods to ensure our safety." How little has changed. In the post-inaugural March for Science, our secular clergymen stated, "Keep funding us in these dark times, or the world will certainly be destroyed." A tad apocalyptic. At least they aren't murdering our children to appease Tlaloc, right? No, but some are calling for them to be thrown into a woodchipper as a show of piety.

"I don't know" is not an answer that gets funded, and if you don't provide an answer, someone else will. Sherlock's Folly is to assume that, because no better theory has been found, no better theory exists. The least-wrong theory ossifies and the correct theory is never sought. They assume everything else has been eliminated, thus the current theory is all the remains. Any new theories that arise can surely be rejected, since the science is settled.