Amen. When I interviewed at Bell Labs at the end of graduate school, I was asked to prepare a 45 min talk that took me 90 min to deliver -- thanks to all the interrupting questions and debate that ensued. It was fantastic! It meant that they cared, and they pushed me in directions I hadn't considered, despite being the nominal expert in my subject. Too often today when I attend a talk, many are not paying much attention (laptops and phones), and the speaker receives little feedback except empty compliments or a few softball questions at the end. Even worse, some speakers take offense at being pushed to defend their work, further stifling intellectual exchange. They should remember that constructive critics are doing them a favor, and that it is an extreme privilege to have the freedom to do science.
Same holds true when scientists post their latest work. Rather than empty compliments and congratulations, they would be better served by thoughtful criticism and questions. This is particularly true for preprints, where the hive mind of X could go a long way to turning a good manuscript into a great publication.
Karl Popper (1902-1994) on what it means to be a rationalist ✍️
When I speak of reason or rationalism, all I mean is the conviction that we can learn through criticism of our mistakes and errors, especially through criticism by others, and eventually also through self-criticism. A rationalist is simply someone for whom it is more important to learn than to be proved right; someone who is willing to learn from others — not by simply taking over another's opinions, but by gladly allowing others to criticize his ideas and by gladly criticizing the ideas of others.
The emphasis here is on the idea of criticism or, to be more precise, critical discussion. The genuine rationalist does not think that he or anyone else is in possession of the truth; nor does he think that mere criticism as such helps us achieve new ideas. But he does think that, in the sphere of ideas, only critical discussion can help us sort the wheat from the chaff. He is well aware that acceptance or rejection of an idea is never a purely rational matter; but he thinks that only critical discussion can give us the maturity to see an idea from more and more sides and to make a correct judgement of it.
-- as mentioned in All Life is Problem Solving (1999)