Comment by bjornsing

An interesting idea very well argued. I think the distinction between weak-link and strong-link problems is an important one. But there are two aspects where I’m not convinced:

1. Some parts of science actually are weak-link problems. For example, if you base your study on the conclusions of five published results and just one of them turns out to be fraudulent, then you’re screwed.

2. The reason that we often end up with weak-link culture and policy when strong-link ditto would be better is not a misdiagnosis of the problem, it’s that weak-link culture and policies benefit the great majority. Most people are (by definition) mediocre, and they benefit greatly from policies that obstruct the positive outliers, because they can’t compete with them without such policies. It’s sad, but it’s a part of human nature to try and set rules that benefits oneself.