I'm considering a return to the demoscene.

In the past decade I was spending my spare time dealing with science, mostly medical science. I actually believed that it would be possible to achieve something good for mankind in this way. But I erred.

For a couple of years I was a member of a group of researchers and together with them, I published several papers on the intersection of endocrinology, immunology, oncology, and psychiatry.

Now I've been reading the autobiography of Dr. Dr. Florian Holsboer, the former director of the German Max Planck Institute for Psychiatry. And although he was in this high position and co-authored more than a thousand papers, he essentially didn't find out any more than that mental disorders are caused by stress - which we also assumed.

I've come to the conclusion that the scientific method is highly limited. Regarding the way mental disorders work, we can actually only make speculations.

For this reason I've decided not to seriously engage with medical research any more and try to focus on creative endeavours instead. I also think that my own personal homepage with all the computer games and artworks I developed is actually far more impressive than the homepage of Dr. Dr. Holsboer, although he lists more than a thousand of publications. Publications aren't read by many people anyway while creative computing projects have the potential to impress the masses.

I won't return to making Hugi, since communication in the scene works also fine without a diskmag, as the past decade has proven. Instead, I'll probably mostly develop computer games, and maybe I'll even make a demo or an intro from time to time.

Hello Adok, 🙋‍♂️

I think the scientific method is powerful, but it is also slow, cautious, and often unable to fully capture the complexity of human experience. In psychiatry especially, much is not really measurable but only describable – and that can be discouraging for someone who is searching for clarity.

Still, I don’t see this as proof that science has failed. To me it’s more a reminder that science alone is not enough when it comes to understanding what it means to be human. Creativity, intuition, and art are tools that open other doors.

Your conclusion that creative projects can sometimes have more impact than scientific publications is a bold thought – and I don’t think you’re wrong. A good game, an impressive demo, or a clever design can touch people emotionally in ways that papers rarely do.

But I also wouldn’t say that science “brings nothing.” It brings a lot – just not always what we personally expect from it.

So I see your turn back to creativity as an honest and understandable decision, but I wouldn’t write off science either. I believe in a world where both have their place – and where they can even enrich each other.

Just my humble opinion as a very small human being. 🙈

Welcome back, my friend. 🤗
- melcom

Many people think that it takes a genius to do science. In reality, at least in medical science much is just trial and error. Also, most medical drugs are just chemically slightly modified natural compounds (e.g. acetylsalicylic acid). Rational, logical thinking doesn't play a big role.