I wonder how one moves in the opposite direction. I am not even sure how to frame my question. I have been given hell quite a lot for trying to explore it, conversationally. But say you have a working hypothesis and are getting results and you know of some research that fits with the situation. How does one effectively present something like that? Not as "proof" but as a place for others to start thinking about the problem space?
I don't ever seem to see scenarios like that addressed.
Have you read http://blog.sethroberts.net/ ? It's not clear to me if that addresses your question, but Roberts criticizes professional science for too much focus on expensive testing of popular hypotheses and not enough on generating and cheap winnowing of ideas.
I don't ever seem to see scenarios like that addressed.