I think that’s a little far — mainly the point where science itself is often a rejection of things that were previously called “common sense”.
But this can also be expanded. There are no fields of science where a singular paper should be widely accepted before replication and additional studies.
Social sciences have a noticeable issue where they lend themselves to dramatic headlines and over extrapolation I suspect that this is largely an aspect of them being much more understandable and ultimately relatable than some of the more niche fields where papers address nearly unapproachable topics
> There are no fields of science where a singular paper should be widely accepted before replication and additional studies.
Certainly within mathematics, this isn't a requirement, and I think the same holds within some branches of theoretical physics, as well as computing science.
I suppose there's a decent argument to be made that these things aren't "Science". Certainly, mathematics uses something different from the empirical method to progress knowledge. But there isn't really a good alternative word.
But this can also be expanded. There are no fields of science where a singular paper should be widely accepted before replication and additional studies.
Social sciences have a noticeable issue where they lend themselves to dramatic headlines and over extrapolation I suspect that this is largely an aspect of them being much more understandable and ultimately relatable than some of the more niche fields where papers address nearly unapproachable topics