I find it noticeably harder to work with a new concept than an old one. To translate a new concept to an old one, I put it into existing terms.
I think what might happen is, during the process of science, we formulate what we’re seeing in our existing terms (ie. memetic climate).
The problem is in letting this take over, or thinking that it is generally true, and not just a way for our brains to manipulate the concept/patterns we’re observing.
Yes, and this leads to another essential point: any new idea is at a fundamental infrastructure disadvantage. For the old idea has been not only etched into the psyche and the ontology of its users, but it has probably (especially in the case of a technical idea) grown a significant epistemic infrastructure around it: tools that embed the assumptions, tricks to simplify computations, tacit knowledge of how to tweak it to make it work.
The new idea has nothing of the sort, and so even if it has eventual advantages, it must first survive in a context where it is probably inferior in result. Which generally comes about through some form of propaganda, of separate community, of a new generation wanting to turn around known wisdom...
Yes, and this leads to another essential point: any new idea is at a fundamental infrastructure disadvantage. For the old idea has been not only etched into the psyche and the ontology of its users, but it has probably (especially in the case of a technical idea) grown a significant epistemic infrastructure around it: tools that embed the assumptions, tricks to simplify computations, tacit knowledge of how to tweak it to make it work.
The new idea has nothing of the sort, and so even if it has eventual advantages, it must first survive in a context where it is probably inferior in result. Which generally comes about through some form of propaganda, of separate community, of a new generation wanting to turn around known wisdom...