According to doctors, Vincent Freeman was born with faulty genetics. His parents were notified that he had a high probability of developing a variety of disorders and, at best, would not live beyond his mid-30s. From an early age he “came to think of [himself] as others thought of [him]—chronically ill. Every skinned knee and runny nose was treated as if it were life-threatening.” Two years after Vincent was born, his parents decided to have a second child, Anton. Unlike his older brother, Anton was genetically superior: “a son [his] father considered worthy of his name.”
Read MoreIllustration: Andrew Lee
The history of science is full of examples of discovery, both intentional and accidental. But how do scientists study subject matter incapable of being explained by simple models? And additionally, if science can produce favorable results (say, in the clinic), to what extent does it matter whether or not the results can be fully explained? Here, Siddhant Iyer outlines the ways in which scientists may study as-of-yet unexplained phenomena and argues for a framework involving the use of complex models while also acknowledging limitations.