>>11895721It's the same reason you see the same from many theoretical economists. They have strongly-held views they've been building up over decades - but the views can't really be proven or disproven, and lots of other people have wildly different views
They each think they've approached the true nature of reality and that everyone else is flailing around wildly in the dark. And they have no way to dissuade the other person or to be persuaded, because they can't empirically prove it at this time.
Theoretical fields are very important, but this is why more practical fields can be more satisfying. You can know, with some degree of confidence, if your theories are at least partly right or wrong on some level. And when they're proven right, you feel a sense of pride and accomplishment, and when they're proven wrong, you can figure out where you went wrong and try to not make similar mistakes in the future, rather than wasting the rest of your life meandering down the wrong alley. And in either case, you've come a little closer to understanding the world.
In theoretical fields, you just kind of argue with everyone forever and tell them their theories are wrong and yours are right, with no satisfying conclusion.
