Software researchers are blinded by their prejudice
and confirmation bias. They refuse to consider the possibility that definitions
based on their flawed assumptions about the essential property and nature of
the physical components might be wrong (e.g. nature of components is not reuse).
One can even convince a devote priest, a possibility that there is no God. But one
can’t make software researchers to see the obvious reality and investigate
Truth: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/284167768_What_is_true_essence_of_Component_Based_Design
I contacted hundreds of researchers and they used
every possible excuse in the world to avoid their obligations and sacred duty,
which is to investigate the Truth and Reality. Pursuit of absolute truth is not
only an obligation of real scientists but also a sacred duty. They made up
their mind and not open to rational reason or investigating Reality. Simply they
are refusing to know reality to investigate Truth. This is how members of any
cult behave.
It would send shockwaves across research community of
any mature scientific disciplines, if one of the basic discoveries or axioms
(considered to be self-evident fact) at the root of a major sub-discipline of
any mature scientific disciplines has never been tested and might be flawed.
The software researchers justify their relying on untested axiom by saying that
the computer science is not real science and/or software engineering is not
real engineering. If that is true, why do they pretend that they are scientists,
researchers and/or engineers? Instead of blocking the progress of knowledge,
they must have integrity to allow real scientists to investigate the reality. If
computer science is a religion they must be priests. If computer science is a cult
they must be cult leaders.
Even the basic sciences were not real science until a
flawed axiom (considered to be self-evident fact) at the root was exposed. Saying
that the Sun is at the center (500 years ago) offended common sense and deeply
entrenched conventional wisdom. The philosophers (scientists referred to as
philosophers) blinded by their prejudice and confirmation bias, choose to
impression Galileo for life rather than investigate reality by looking through
his telescope.
If the philosophers were wrong (i.e. a cult) for
relying on untested axiom (i.e. the Earth is static) until 500 years ago, software
researchers and scientists were also a cult for relying on axiom that were
never tested. No one can name, who discovered and who proved the definitions
for so called software components and CBSE. If I am wrong, where can I find the
documentation for the proof? Defending and relying on untested axioms (by
insisting the axiom is self-evident Truth requires no validation) is not
science but a cult.
History proved that no real science can ever be
created by relying of an untested flawed myth (by concluding that the myth is
self-evident truth requires no validation). How any one can pretend to be
scientists/researchers, if they insist that there is nothing wrong in relying
on untested fundamentally flawed axiom for advancing the our knowledge (e.g.
when there is no evidence exists to show any one ever validated the axiom)?
Furthermore almost every one admits that existing concepts and definitions for
CBSE contradict reality we know about the physical components and CBD of
physical products.
Mankind already wasted 30 years by relying untested
axiom (i.e. myth) and willing to waste rest of their life by relying on the
myth rather than investigate the Truth and Reality. If this kind of flaw is
discovered in basic sciences such as physics or botany, wouldn’t it send a
shockwaves? Unfortunately software researchers justify this by saying computer
science is not a real science and yet they consider them selves scientists and researchers.
How can they consider themselves scientists and engineers,
if they insist computer science is not real science and software engineering is
not real engineering? If computer science is real science, can they rely on
untested myth (by insisting that it is self-evident fact that needs no
validation)? Don’t they need to have an
irrefutable proof for the basic facts on which they have been relying for
advancement of knowledge? If the basic fact on which they have been relying is
flawed, isn’t every concept derived most likely be flawed?
They made up their mind and not open to rational
reason or investigating Reality. This is how members of any cult behave. Not only they are wasting their time by
relying on untested myth, they are teaching the myth (as if it is self-evident
Truth) to brainwash impressionable students to expand the cult. If one ready to
accept software is not real science/engineering rather than investigate Truth,
how can he consider himself a scientist/researcher?
Can any real scientist ignore reality and continue to
rely on unproven myths (by refusing to investigate reality), even after
acknowledging that the myths were never validated, and has no basis in reality
but in fact contradict reality? http://real-software-components.blogspot.in/2015/11/each-researcher-has-obligation-to-know.html
Best Regards,
Raju Chiluvuri
No comments:
Post a Comment