id	author	title	date	pages	extension	mime	words	sentences	flesch	summary	cache	txt
cord-353876-pb4of7s9	Fortaleza, Carlos Magno Castelo Branco	Evidence, rationality, and ignorance: Agnotological issues in COVID-19 science	2020-09-21		.txt	text/plain	3261	180	45	Researchers, public health authorities, and healthcare workers should be equipped to identify such agnotological strategies, distinguish them from scientific fraud, and avoid drawing misleading inferences based on an irrational adherence to hypotheses and a lack of criticism of implausible results. It may surprise an orthodox practitioner of evidence-based medicine (EBM) to learn that, in accordance with a tradition that dates back to David Hume (1711-1776), Popper rejected induction, which refers to the notion that a series of observations and experiments (i.e., evidence) allows one to draw inferences about general scientific laws or generate "recommendations." Popper's views can be summarized as follows: "there are several sources of knowledge, but science progresses blindly toward the truth rather by eliminating errors (by continuous criticism and empirical research) than from gathering cumulative evidences." Despite major ideological differences, some of the greatest 20 th century philosophers of science (Popper 2 , Kuhn 3 , Lakatos 4 , and Feyerabend 5 ) prioritized rationality over the accumulation of evidence.	./cache/cord-353876-pb4of7s9.txt	./txt/cord-353876-pb4of7s9.txt