Peer review is fine, as long as you're making incremental

Hear, O seekers of wisdom and innovation, the words of Lonnie Johnson, inventor and visionary, who spake thus: “Peer review is fine, as long as you’re making incremental improvements to a technology.” At first these words may sound modest, but in truth they are a clarion call to courage. For Johnson reminds us that the machinery of consensus often applauds the small and the safe, but hesitates before the great leap, the daring idea, the creation that hath no precedent.

Mark this truth: peer review is the gathering of minds, the weighing of ideas, and the testing of claims. It is a guardian of knowledge, ensuring that fraud and folly are not mistaken for wisdom. Yet it is also bound by the cautious spirit of men, who more readily bless a small step forward than a bold stride into the unknown. Incremental changes are praised, but radical visions are often resisted, for they unsettle the foundations upon which others have built their works.

Consider the tale of Galileo, who looked through his glass and saw moons orbiting Jupiter, a truth that shattered the old order of the heavens. The peer review of his age—the scholars, the churchmen, the custodians of learning—did not rejoice. They mocked, they scorned, they silenced. His ideas were not incremental; they were revolutionary. And so, though true, they were cast aside for a time. Here we see Johnson’s insight: peer review protects the steady stream of knowledge, but it often resists the flood.

So too in Johnson’s own life. Known to the world as the inventor of the Super Soaker, he also labored on technologies of profound importance, such as advanced batteries and energy systems. His greatest visions often met resistance, for they were not mere incremental improvements, but radical departures from what was known. Many peers, bound by convention, doubted their worth. Yet Johnson endured, and in time, his inventions proved their power. His journey is proof that the most transformative ideas often must withstand skepticism until the world is ready to receive them.

Yet let us not despise peer review. It is a necessary shield, protecting science from error, illusion, and deceit. Without it, charlatans would prosper, and falsehood would masquerade as truth. But Johnson’s words remind us that this shield can also become a wall, blocking the path of pioneers. It is well suited for the gardener who tendeth the field row by row, but less suited for the explorer who seeks to cross the sea. For the work of the explorer requires faith beyond approval, courage beyond consensus.

The lesson is clear: do not be dismayed if thy boldest ideas are met with doubt. Understand that the guardians of knowledge often favor the slow path, but history is moved by those who dare to leap. When the world resists, endure with patience; when peers doubt, let results speak. In time, truth overcomes skepticism, and what was once scorned becomes the foundation of new generations.

Practical is this counsel: if thou art a creator, know when to seek the wisdom of peer review, and when to walk boldly without it. For small refinements, embrace the counsel of others; for great visions, endure the resistance, and trust the worth of thy labor. Share thy work with persistence, prove its value with evidence, and stand firm in the storm of doubt. For the greatest revolutions of technology were once dismissed as folly.

Thus remember Lonnie Johnson’s words: “Peer review is fine, as long as you’re making incremental improvements to a technology.” His wisdom is a reminder of balance: cherish the counsel of peers, but do not be chained by their caution. For the future belongs not only to those who polish the old, but to those who dare to build the new. And the world, though slow to see it, shall one day call them visionaries.