Most great inventions born of naïveté die when exposed to sophistication.

 

Example(s)?

 

"Yes it does look like a duck - albeit a gilded copper one.
And yes! It does quack and yes it flaps its wings, drinks water and eats food to, and yes, foul smelling effluent doth pour fresh from its Meta Ciaca .
Heavens! I declare it must be a duck, By Crikey".
Max.

 

Example(s)?

Many a well meant thread here.

 

If your heart wasn't broken a few times in life you haven't lived.

The EMDrive is a good case study, as is almost anything involving 'Tesla' and the physics of electricity.

 

And some of superior designs die because of big $$$'s thrown at the inferior competition.
BetaMax.
Windows Operating system.
For a couple, many more out there.
Max.

 

And some of superior designs die because of big $$$'s thrown at the inferior competition.
BetaMax.
Windows Operating system.
For a couple, many more out there.
Max.

But that's not the idea I am addressing. Many, many times "groundbreaking" inventions are merely the result of ignorance of the problem. People believe they've found a loophole because they simply don't know enough. This is the much, much more common case than those where someone spots what experts haven't.

If something is startlingly simple, yet isn't being done, it probably won't work.

 

But that's not the idea I am addressing. Many, many times "groundbreaking" inventions are merely the result of ignorance of the problem. People believe they've found a loophole because they simply don't know enough. This is the much, much more common case than those where someone spots what experts haven't.

If something is startlingly simple, yet isn't being done, it probably won't work.

Stage two of the 'arrogance of innocence' : Conspiracy theories of why the experts say it can't work. It's never their own fault, is it? Has to be some big conspiracy to keep their obvious genius from the world.

Stage three of the 'arrogance of non-innocence' : The work is proven to be rubbish and proponents are just too invested and too embarrassed to admit it, so they circle the wagons and resort to even wilder conspiracy theories for why people are not agreeing with them.

 

Example(s)?

The STEORN fiasco.

Magnetic wheel perpetual motion machine. Advertised in “The Economist.” Assembled panel of experts. Raised millioms. Experts took about a year then declared they saw no evidence of over-unity or anything not explainable bu existing physics.

Bob

 

Most great inventions born of naïveté die when exposed to sophistication.

Yaakov I agree! I also say it's interesting how that same principal applies to careers of businesses, politicians and even just entertainers! They start out with novel idea which is very well received until success (which I say is fair parallel to sophistication in narrow sense of what I'm saying here) makes them swell headed, complacent, paradoxically self-conscious and I say worst of all totally deaf to their constituency!

So anyhow I'm sorry this is a little OT from your post, but I couldn't help commenting on parallel.

 

But that's not the idea I am addressing. Many, many times "groundbreaking" inventions are merely the result of ignorance of the problem. People believe they've found a loophole because they simply don't know enough. This is the much, much more common case than those where someone spots what experts haven't.

If something is startlingly simple, yet isn't being done, it probably won't work.

Yaakov NOW I get what you're talking about! So I say don't let over-unity quacks get to you! Just toss them some breadcrumbs and a June bug or two and they're totally happy to be unobtrusively blissful in their incurable ignorance

 

Most great inventions born of naïveté die when exposed to sophistication.

Your title should be, "The Arrogance of Ignorance".

 

Your title should be, "The Arrogance of Ignorance".

Ignorance doesn't cover the trusting (a belief in the good intentions of others) aspect normally seen.

High school date joke:

Q: How far have you gone with a guy?
A: I went to Canada with my dad once.

 

Remember "Cold Fusion"

A pariah field, cast out by the scientific establishment. Between cold fusion and respectable science there is virtually no communication at all. Cold fusion papers are almost never published in refereed scientific journals, with the result that those works don't receive the normal critical scrutiny that science requires. On the other hand, because the Cold-Fusioners see themselves as a community under siege, there is little internal criticism. Experiments and theories tend to be accepted at face value, for fear of providing even more fuel for external critics, if anyone outside the group was bothering to listen. In these circumstances, crackpots flourish, making matters worse for those who believe that there is serious science going on here

kv

 

The EMDrive is a good case study

you had to bring that up ...

 

But that's not the idea I am addressing. Many, many times "groundbreaking" inventions are merely the result of ignorance of the problem. People believe they've found a loophole because they simply don't know enough. This is the much, much more common case than those where someone spots what experts haven't.

If something is startlingly simple, yet isn't being done, it probably won't work.

I must admit that - due to linguistic deficiencies - I am not able to follow the discussion in detail.
Therefore, to understand the real background of your point: Can you please provide some examples for your assertion?

 

you had to bring that up ...

Because it's a great example of the intersection of Innocence, Ignorance and Arrogance promoting the dubious. A close second would be the Energy Catalyzer (E-Cat) but that's more of a pure fraud.
https://skepticalinquirer.org/2019/01/why_e-cat_is_a_hoax/?/si/show/why_e-cat_is_a_hoax

 

Because it's a great example of the intersection of Innocence, Ignorance and Arrogance promoting the dubious. A close second would be the Energy Catalyzer (E-Cat) but that's more of a pure fraud.
https://skepticalinquirer.org/2019/01/why_e-cat_is_a_hoax/?/si/show/why_e-cat_is_a_hoax

I agree... and some hoaxes have real serious consequences:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/hundreds-...2640448&cid=clicksource_4380645_null_card_hed​

More than 300 students, faculty and staff at UCLA and Cal State University, Los Angeles were under quarantine while health officials work to determine if they'd been vaccinated, the universities said.

 

I agree... and some hoaxes have real serious consequences:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/hundreds-...2640448&cid=clicksource_4380645_null_card_hed​

+1
Anti-vaccination hoaxers are risking lives. This all started from an elaborate fraud: https://www.vaxreport.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=579&Itemid=884
https://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-summary.htm

But Deer’s investigation – nominated in February 2011 for two British Press Awards – discovered that, while Wakefield held himself out to be a dispassionate scientist, two years before the Lancet paper was published – and before any of the 12 children were even referred to the hospital – he had been hired to attack MMR by a lawyer, Richard Barr: a jobbing solicitor in the small eastern English town of King’s Lynn, who hoped to raise a speculative class action lawsuit against drug companies which manufactured the triple shot.

Unlike expert witnesses, who give professional advice and opinions, Wakefield had negotiated an unprecedented contract with Barr, then aged 48, to conduct clinical and scientific research. The goal was to find evidence of what the two men claimed to be a “new syndrome”, intended to be the centrepiece of (later failed) litigation on behalf of an eventual 1,600 British families, recruited through media stories. This publicly undisclosed role for Wakefield created the grossest conflict of interest, and the exposure of it by Deer, in February 2004, led to public uproar in Britain, the retraction of the Lancet report’s conclusions section, and, from July 2007 to May 2010, the longest-ever professional misconduct hearing by the UK’s General Medical Council (GMC).

 

Wonder if Richard is related to William? Seems to have same level of credibility as a lawyer.