Science tends to be phenomenological in its crude attention grabbing inital step and then, seeking to escape rthe complexity of things resorts to vapid statistics which are a) unsatisfying as they expose no mechanisms, arguing instead: THIS IS [probably} it! Well, aws we invade and overwhelm science with the profit motive, fraud and blindness to error poison everything as people who devoted 25 yrs of their lives to get their own research grant become desperate Jesuits for the big old names Popes whose dogmas prevail: hence "canionical" notions, and b) the ultimate arbitrator of scientific truth becomes the Court of Law as vitims of researchers' wishful thinking sue for rfraud and damages and the theory is "economically" dropped, never really replaced by "scentifically derived mechanisms. Yep, we're doing TRUMPIAN SCIENCE as it is estimated that at least 1/3 of all PUBLISHED articles are fraudulent out of despair. So, shouldn't someone who devoted jumping throuigh hoops to qualify for a PhD be assured in the end a stable if modest living so long as he/she works at truth instead of someone else's profit and egomania instead of a devotion to benifiting Society with SCIENTIFIC TRUITH by open collabioration with collegues?
What are the downsides?