Certainty or systematic uncertainty?

However, the antithesis to the renaissance of anti-science and anti-intellectualism is not "scientocracy", as Prof. Dr. Peter Strohschneider, President of the German Research Foundation (DFG), described it. The response to populist expert bashing must not stop at the defiant "science is right"; not because it is not true, but because it is not effective against populist attacks.

Science, at least beyond Newtonian mechanics, does not provide any truths, it must remain self-critically irritable, it is pluralistic. This applies in particular to the social sciences. What is not up for debate, however, and what constitutes the actual core of science that is worth preserving and defending, is the method of approaching knowledge (always further and never completely). Rigor is required here, self-criticism and distance from one's own professional actions are not a danger, but the survival backpack of science. "It seems to me that the system is more secure than security within it" (Wittgenstein).

"Can we go a size smaller?" - So many words on a website for a small subject area in educational science that is perceived as marginal in terms of content? No, it can't be smaller, because it isn't smaller. We have young people studying here who, intentionally or unintentionally, will be role models for future generations throughout their careers. Research methodology is not a collection of more or less sophisticated "techniques", it is the foundation of a view of the world.

This is exhausting, sometimes frustrating. But so are sport and piano lessons ...