Over the summer, I wrote an essay on the spontaneous order of science (for the Carl Menger Essay Contest). I discussed the existence of systemic error in science and implications of sporder for improving science. My argument is basically that attempts at top down control or regulation of a sporder are doomed to fail, and we should be skeptical of government involvement in science. Instead, bottom up approaches that improve incentives should be emphasized.

Since then, I came across a mind-blowing paper by Robin Hanson that makes a powerful case for using prediction markets on scientific hypotheses to sharply reduce bias and systemic error from science: Could Gambling Save Science. I highly recommend looking at Hanson’s paper, it’s a very interesting and exciting idea. In light of this, I updated my paper with a section on prediction markets as the best solution we are likely to get.

Read it here: Spontaneous Order, Interventionism, and the Integrity of Science.