Science Is the Belief in the Ignorance of Experts
That line from Richard Feynman has never been more relevant, so far.
As agentic AI automates many tasks in traditional expert roles like doctor, engineer, analyst, or architect, we’ll all move toward the same core function: learning how to question what the machine says.
AI gives us the prevailing view among experts. It is trained on large public and licensed datasets. It is the record of known results. But new knowledge does not come from agreement. It comes from doubt.
Our role now is to look at what the machine outputs and ask, how could this be wrong? To run experiments, to test boundaries, to consider cases that contradict the default answer. To create hypotheses, try to disprove them, and identify boundary conditions where the model fails.
That’s what science really is, testing claims against evidence. In this next phase, everyone becomes a scientist. Not by degree, but by method.
Are you a (data) scientist?
In the past week alone, I’ve reviewed more than a hundred resumes from people who call themselves data scientists. Maybe that’s where we’re all heading. Soon, most jobs will involve scientific work. You’ll be a medical data scientist, a legal data scientist, a construction data scientist, and so on.
Do you believe in science? Or do you believe something to be true because someone reputable said that it is true?
If you do, then you are not a scientist. Because believing in science is itself unscientific. Scientists don’t believe, they doubt. The scientific method is not about proving what you already think is true, it’s about trying to disprove it.
That’s what the so-called “null hypothesis” means, though the name is misleading. It sounds like it means “no hypothesis,” but what it really means is this: when you hold a belief, your job is to challenge it, not defend it. You don’t collect data to prove yourself right, you collect data to see if you might be wrong.
A better term for the null hypothesis might be the doubt hypothesis, or even the humility hypothesis. Because real science is an act of humility.
It’s the same principle behind Hanlon’s Razor, don’t attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity. When we stop assuming intent and start looking for evidence, we act scientifically.
So the next time you catch yourself holding a strong opinion (especially one reinforced by ChatGPT!), ask: am I trying to prove this, or am I trying to disprove it?
The answer will tell you whether you are just another believer, or a true scientist.