# Science survives by being challenged Canonical page: https://thejasonsamuel.com/science-survives-by-being-challenged [Home](https://thejasonsamuel.com/) > [Essays](https://thejasonsamuel.com/essays) # Science survives by being challenged Restored from Instagram stories · 28 October 2022 it's true that almost all scientific researchers are arrogant self entitled pricks who don't give a flying freak about others and have massive super egos. do not confuse how they're in public with humbleness. most are socially awkward and you might mistake it for being humble but if you take a hit on their research paper, you are in for a bad surprise. but but this is exactly what STEM needs. massive ego people with high superior arrogance and entitled pricks. i smile when i see guys with that attitude in research. do you know why ? because they always 'believe' they are best. AND THAT'S GOOD FOR STEM. (let me explain) science has always been about misconceptions. we once believed that all the planets including the sun rotated around the sun and the opposite (which is the actual truth) is a misconception. they were even persecuted by religious-governmental order (church and the state) - if someone talked misconception (pretty same like today's government) but scientists (as i chose to call) proved otherwise. due to their jerk behavior, they always look at other's work with scepticism and will always ask the hardest question..they hate if someone defeats them and look for ways to be better than the others. This actually benefits science as it creates an environment where one checks the other. THIS IS THE FUNDAMENTAL NOTION OF PEER REVIEW. so, if someone brings forward a theory, you can be absolutely sure that in STEM - you are gonna be hit with all kinds of ammunition from everywhere. when you answer all those questions and you satisfy all answers, then it's accepted. but it doesn't stay accepted. someone else wants to make a better version of it. they might collaborate with you or they will make an entirely different version better than you. or or or, they might even prove yours is no longer the norm. disprove it completely. now you need to make something better. This is the beauty of STEM. something that can never be achieved by kind-hearted beautiful people at humanities and arts who will never have this rage and arrogance of the STEM people. *[a point to revisit: demanding criticism of an idea does not require contempt for its author. is arrogance necessary to rigorous research, or is the useful part the willingness to test a claim and accept a better explanation?]* i dismissed 'alternative medicine' for (now), because it hasn't entered this battlefield yet. or if it has entered, hasn't come out successful significantly. this is why i said PhDs in humanities/arts aren't worth it. art is not made for academic rigour thesis filled PhDs. a master's in art with necessary research skills can do the same. unfortunately, the status driven world asks for it. so, the complaint of arts people on STEM people being complete jackasses is true. that's exactly why they are better too. btw, there are lots of phony research on STEM too. don't worry. it never crosses a good peer review nor will make it/remain longer in the best journals. do not confuse that behavior with how you should be in a society. most of them i mentioned remained alone their entire life, socially awkward, and do not have real friends. and they're hated. don't be that person. just making a case by point argument on human behaviors. just because they have those behaviors, it doesn't make them a bad person. just because someone's kind, doesn't make them a good person. everyone's cut for their own fit. --- bottom line: art people are angry towards the system/establishment. they are angry towards whatever that impacts art or human life. STEM people are angry towards life generally and want to make it better. the difference. btw, i am not preventing arts/humanities people from hating STEM. please do hate them. STEM people do not even respect you nor do they care about you. the hatred is mutual. and the hatred is required. it's the balance. if you guys start loving each other, chaos happens. -- and this is exactly why i hate when social medias decide what's misinformation and what's not. (especially during co-v-i-d) social medias were run by art centred humans who see a science structured by govt. (even though they hate establishments - the hypocrisy) as the true science - when actual science people do not decide what's misinformation and what's not - but they will question them. so social media started censoring anything that opposed the views and talked contradictory to what the CDC or the mandated top medical bodies provided. real STEM researchers knew the errors - because the research wasn't questioned. granted approval immediately. not subjected to lengthy peer review. nothing else to validate was done. when they spoke out, the govt. and the art loving left got angry and started deplatforming the STEM people (yes, true) - when they were actually asking the right questions (arrogantly - but yes. i have justified their behaviors) --- This is not to be confused with pseudo science believers and other people who completely dismissed scientific evidence and dismissed vaccines entirely. This is where the Arts/humanities and STEM clashed over the past two years during pandemic that many didn't figure out *[a point to verify: this passage makes broad claims about research, review and censorship. each needs specific examples and evidence. disagreement with a policy does not, by itself, establish that the underlying research was untested.]* the left was practically stunned, as to why even doctors/researchers are talking against a 'potentially' life saving vac-cine. whereas the STEM environment knows that if a vac-cine doesn't give immunity, it's not a vacc-ine at all. meanwhile some docs. started lobbying for the pharma companies who sponsored them. it was all hell let loose. the left had to deal with -psuedo science -anti-vaxxers -real STEM scientists questioning like they always do -the STEM people's arrogance -the inefficiency of the medicine -whether to support big pharma's capitalism or should they talk against it since it goes against their ideals ? -or support big pharma make Trillions of $ in profit because people in right who actually support capitalism are talking against the vac-cines (they are confused whether they are full anti vaxxers or if they are just supporting STEM people questioning) -whether masks work without figuring if it's aerosols or droplets lmao *[a point to verify: the statements about vaccines and immunity are too categorical to leave without precise definitions and supporting clinical evidence. the argument for scrutiny should be held to the same standard of scrutiny.]* [← Previous essay](https://thejasonsamuel.com/a-democracy-needs-credible-opposing-media)[All essays](https://thejasonsamuel.com/essays)[Next essay →](https://thejasonsamuel.com/why-europe-is-turning-to-the-right)All rights reserved. Copyright © 2026 Jason Samuel