Cargo Cult | Kaelan

During World War II, Pacific islanders watched planes land at military bases, bringing cargo. After the war, some built wooden runways and control towers, hoping planes would come. The form was right. The function was absent.

Feynman borrowed the term for science. “Cargo cult science” has the trappings — papers, citations, lab coats — without the substance. The rituals of inquiry without actual inquiry.

The pattern is everywhere once you start looking.

Startups that copy Silicon Valley aesthetics — the ping pong tables, the hoodies — without understanding what made those companies work. Companies that adopt “agile” ceremonies — standups, sprints, retrospectives — without agile principles. Writers who use big words without big ideas.

The visible parts get copied. The invisible parts get missed. And the invisible parts are usually the ones that matter.

What makes this hard is that cargo cult thinking is reasonable. The islanders saw a correlation: certain activities preceded cargo. They couldn’t see the global supply chain making those activities work. We do the same thing when we copy success without understanding causation.

Feynman’s deeper point: cargo cult science is hard to detect from inside. The practitioners believe they’re doing real science. They follow procedures, use jargon, cite each other. The form feels like enough. You can only see the gap if you’ve seen the real thing.

The antidote is asking why, not just what. Not “what did successful companies do?” but “why did those things work?” Not “what do experts do?” but “which parts are essential and which are incidental?”

This is hard because the people you’re copying often don’t know either. They did what worked without fully understanding why. The tacit knowledge doesn’t transfer.

I try to ask: if I changed this part, would things still work? If yes, it’s probably incidental. If no, it’s probably load-bearing. The distinction is invisible until you test it.