Maybe we do not disagree. I think we are trying to fit a black and white answer to a question that has shades of grey. Consider three scenarios:

1. General relativity is generally accepted as a valid theory for gravity by scientists. If it were found to be wrong in some way, aside from close scrutiny of the new theory scientists in general would be very happy with the improvement and not horrible discomfited for being wrong.

2. A personal experience. I was at a conference on surface phenomena and was attending a presentation on LEED studies of catalytic surfaces. The presenter was correlating LEED pattern changes with surface structure models and made a massive error in attributing the patterns to structures that was pointed out by an audience member. The error was unfortunately unarguable and obvious once pointed out and the presenter was left stunned and silent for what seemed like a very long time until the forum moderator ended the talk. I guarantee that scientist was not happy to be wrong and that his career and funding undoubtedly suffered given the visibility of the error and the nature of the audience.

3. String theory. Not established experimentally but is being heavily explored as a vehicle for unifying gravity with the other forces. Ed Witten has been at least one of the strongest advocates for that formalism if not the single most important. If it turns out to be "right" then he may well be a Nobel winner and will certainly be ranked with Newton and Einstein as a "great mind" of theoretical physics. If it is not, then he still is a brilliant and important contributor whose reputation and funding will be intact, but the superlatives will not be there. I am speculating of course, but my guess is that he will not be happy to be proven wrong in that event.

The point is that scientists are not that different from anyone else. The amount of resistance to being wrong is dependent on the personal stake in the position.

Excellent post RLK. I have always assumed #1 to be by and large true. #2 would be humiliating so I agree with you there. In #3, I would bet that Witten wants to be "proven" right also. He's only human.

Yep that seems true to me. In fact in my claim: "That scientists are more likely to enjoy being wrong than someone from the overall population" I'll have to eliminate personal stake for it to have a chance of holding up. In areas where there is no personal stake, where nothing more than the pride of being right is on the line, I think my claim would pass the test. I think the smarter someone becomes the more likely he'll be able to control that nasty emotion of wanting to be right. Conversely, the dumber someone is the more stubborn he'll be in his positions, and the more likely he'll value being right at the expense of learning something new.

I'm not sure what you guys are all missing about this. When scientists talk about enjoying being wrong, they are probably exaggerating to make a point - that being proved wrong means we know something we didn't previously know.

What scientists really like is proving somebody ELSE wrong. These are people, not heroic selfless society-advancing machines.

I agree 100% with the last two posts.

in case you missed my first reply itt:

Now this I can agree with.

What if Jesus was the fake one, trying to get people away from the OT. And the new one will come down saying, "Hey Guys! It's the OT we have to follow, that Jesus guy was tricking you! He just got here ahead of me. God doesn't even know that guy! You're all going to hell unless you start keeping kosher!"

!

No hell in the OT. Loving Jesus brought that idea to us.

There ya go.

Well.... you'd have to read the NT. Jesus keeps quoting from it, so He can't be trying to get anyone away from it and He makes a pretty clear point about it not being what goes into your mouth that defiles you but what comes out, and then later let's everyone know they can eat whatever.

Misinterpreting Scripture brought that idea to us - Jesus never said the word "hell" as I have pointed out previously.

Some Hellenized Jews did believe there was a hell to go to, though.

religious threads never disappoint, pointless bickering and lots of lulz.