Dear Friends,
The widely accepted ethical obligation and code of
conduct among the research communities is: It is unethical or dishonest (if not
fraud) to blindly support or promote any theory or concept (in the theoretical
foundation for or Body of Knowledge of any scientific discipline) by deliberately
ignoring or hiding counter-evidence. It is a moral and ethical obligation for
each and every researcher to address each of the demonstrable counter-evidences
for any theory or concept he/she is defending or promoting.
The sacred duty of researchers of each of the
scientific or technological disciplines is to investigate evidence for eliminating
flawed pieces of knowledge such as theories or concepts form the BoK (Body of
Knowledge), for example, if and when irrefutable counter-evidence is presented
or demonstrated. Ignoring (even due to prejudice) or hiding (by being
complacent) such demonstrable counter-evidence is also unethical abdication of
the sacred duty.
Any accepted piece or part of knowledge (e.g. theory
or concept in the BoK) could cause irreparable damage, if it is fundamentally
flawed. For example, each new piece or part of knowledge would likely be
corrupted, if it is added by relying on such fundamentally flawed pieces of
knowledge. Such corruption spreads overtime, if the BoK is expanded by adding
more and more new pieces or parts of knowledge (by relying on such flawed or
corrupted pieces of knowledge), which eventually results in altered perception
of reality (e.g. paradoxical paradigm). Also, it is a fool’s errand to rely on
such flawed or corrupted BoK (by engineering researchers) for making any useful
technological invention. It is the sacred duty and moral obligation of each and
every researcher to prevent such insidious spread of corruption and dangerous
consequences of such BoK having large chunks of corrupted knowledge.
I am
sure every scientist in the world must agree that: The biggest and most
well-documented mistake in the history of science is “relying on a flawed myth
(i.e. the Earth is static) without properly testing and/or validating it”. The
“scientific method” was formulated and formalized in the 17th century in the
light of pain and suffering endured and insights gained from the first-hand
experience of putting the research efforts onto the right path by exposing the
error. The “scientific method” was formulated particularly to avoid this kind
of mistake at any cost: To prevent researchers form relying on flawed
assumptions (e.g. rooted in prejudice, fantasy or myths), which are in
contradiction to the objective reality.
Answer
to this question is objective reality: Which planet is at the centre of our planetary
system? Relying on the wrong answer (the Earth is static at centre) to this
question about 2000 years ago diverted mankind’s research efforts (e.g. for
understanding the reality by finding rational explanation) into a wrong path.
The research efforts persisted in the wrong path for nearly 1500 years without
realizing the error. This resulted in the geocentric paradox – a flawed altered
perception of reality.
Software
researchers repeated the same kind of mistake. Repeating exactly same kind of
mistake in the 21st century must be shocking. Even more shocking is that
many software researchers reacting not much different from the ignorant
fanatics in the dark ages, who actively supported killing of Giordano Bruno and
life imprisonment of Galileo. This kind of mistake is not committed by any
other discipline in past 400 years. The researchers of software are ignoring or
hiding demonstrable counter-evidence that falsifies their theories or concepts.
The
answers to these 2 questions are objective realities (1) what is the nature and
true essence of CBD (Component Based Design/development) for physical products
and (2) what is the unique nature and essential properties uniquely and
universally shared by each and every known physical component in the world. Researches
of computer science (software) repeated this kind of cardinal sin nearly 50
years ago by ignoring such objective realities. The myths and assumption at the
root of the existing CBSD paradox are in clear contradiction to the objective
reality (as the flawed belief/myth “the Earth is static” at the root of
geocentric paradox was in clear contradiction to the reality).
The
nature and properties of so called software components and CBSD (CBD for
software) were blindly defined (based on fantasy, prejudice and wishful
thinking) 50 years ago without any consideration to the objective reality. The
research efforts have been persisting in the wrong path for 50 years without
realizing the error. This resulted in existing CBSD paradox – a flawed altered
perception of reality. A huge BoK (Body of Knowledge) accumulated for 50 years
comprising tens of thousands of published papers and thousands of books world
over backed by epicycles of software as empirical evidence in support of the
geocentric paradox of the software.
I have
been doing research passionately (ever since I accidentally stumbled onto a
fascinating new kind of software components 15 years ago), which lead to the
discoveries of nature and reality such as true essence of CBD and essential
properties of physical components. My patented inventions are rooted in such
discovery of the reality and facts about the components and CBD.
I
informed hundreds of respected researchers and leading scientists about the
nature and true essence of real-CBD: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284167768_What_is_true_essence_of_Component_Based_Design
and provided demonstrable counter-evidence, which demonstrates that it
is possible to invent real-software-components for achieving real-CBD for
software (that exposes flawed myths at the root of existing paradox) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292378253_Brief_Introduction_to_COP_Component_Oriented_Programming
The
above evidence clearly contradicts the concepts in published papers and books.
Unfortunately, many respected researchers have been using so many
unsubstantiated dishonest excuses to evade their ethical or moral obligation to
address counter-evidence. Promoting any concepts or theories without addressing
known counter-evidence is unethical and it is fraud to deliberately hiding such
counter-evidence. Even after knowing
the possible evidence that prove their concepts and theories are no more than
epicycles of software engineering’s geocentric paradox, they continue to
promote their concepts and theories by deliberately ignoring the clear
counter-evidence.
Empirical falsification is proven scientific method
for detecting flawed pieces of knowledge and for eliminating corrupted chunks
of knowledge in the BoK. Deliberately ignoring or hiding demonstrable empirical
counter-evidence is abdication of moral and ethical obligations. Software
researchers committed or repeated a huge mistake. Exposing it leads to software
engineering revolution. I can’t
believe, researchers in the 21st century repeating one of the
biggest mistakes in the history. More shocking is they are reacting no
differently from the fanatics in the dark ages. Even after knowing counter
evidence, many choose to ignore the evidence to promote the geocentric paradox
of software. Initially I thought they were complacent and/or prejudice. But
after so many attempts spanning many years, I am beginning to think that they
have abdicated their sacred and ethical duty.
How any
flawed piece of knowledge could ever be falsified, if the researchers deliberately
ignore or hide empirical counter-evidence that can clearly falsify the piece of
knowledge? Isn’t it unethical or
dishonest (if not fraud) to blindly support or promote any theory or concept by
ignoring or hiding counter-evidence? This kind of behavior must not be tolerated
by honest and genuine researchers in the interest of scientific and
technological progress. Such behavior causes irreparable damage to BoK, by injecting
and promoting corruption.
Best
Regards,
Raju S
Chiluvuri
No comments:
Post a Comment