What qualifies as science?

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by Jozen-Bo, Apr 25, 2017.

  1. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    Observation evidence ?

    Many doctors have observed patients with observational out of body knowledge , of the operation and converstations between operational staff .
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,798
    It's hopefully changing, which was the purpose of William F. McComas' paper. To reduce the influence of the science "myths" upon textbooks. Only the global or universal claim about SM is legend -- not multiple methods and statistical approaches applied / recruited in varying contexts.
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2017
    danshawen likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    Myths , such as . Refer to my post #81 for example .
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    I got my first introduction to the Scientific Method in the sixth grade (elementary school) in the 1960's. Mr. Komatsoulis, an American science teacher of Greek heritage gave the lesson and it was something I remembered thoughout my life. The other thing he taught us, that with any freedom comes responsibility, is also an early lesson that life's experiences deepened for an entire lifetime. Mr. Komatsoulis was only a part time teacher, also worked for NASA in the '60s, probably did a lot of work on the Apollo mission support, but he taught us about the scientific method almost a decade before that, about the time of Sputnik and the space race.

    Another experimentalist. Excellent. I hope you passed on some of this wisdom. It seems to be in shorter supply than ever these days.
     
  8. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    Now THAT McComas, Myths of Science, is a really good paper on the subject. I read nothing at all in it that I would disagree with. Thank you.
     
  9. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    I see , the experimentalist is important of course . Yet being an experimentatist does not equate with the freedom of the experiment conceived by an open mind .
     
  10. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,619
    When I was a biological science student (at a pretty good science school in California) I don't recall any lectures on scientific method.

    My impression is that here in the US scientific method is stressed more in those subjects whose claim to be sciences might be disputed. Psychology, sociology and cultural anthropology for example.

    I'd guess that the same is true in the UK.
     
    danshawen likes this.
  11. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,619
    Yes, I agree that Einstein's special relativity does almost seem to be a deduction from observation, for precisely the reasons you give. Maybe I can shelter my earlier remark under its "rarely if ever" qualifier. This might constitute the "rarely". Einstein did have to embrace a hugely counter-intuitive assumption though, even if it was kind of hanging right there in front of everyone in experimental results like Michelson and Morley's. Nobody else seemed willing to grasp it.

    I'm inclined to lean towards methodological and ontological pluralism at the moment.

    I like to think that scientists have a whole toolkit of assorted methods that they dip into as needs dictate. There isn't any established algorithm that tells them which methodological procedure or tool to employ when. Part of scientific creativity is figuring out new and original ways of deploying existing methods and maybe even inventing a new one now and then.

    And I'm inclined to think that there are different kinds of being. Physical objects exist in one way. The laws of physics exist in another way. Fictional characters like Sherlock Holmes exist in yet another way. We need to make sense of ideas and word meanings. Numbers and the abstract structures of mathematics certainly seem to have some kind of objective existence. We probably need to have some account of unrealized possibilities which might arguably even be observed having physical effects in quantum mechanics. The past, present and future seem to have different kinds of reality. If it is to have any claim to completeness, metaphysics will have to provide an account of all of that. (I expect that some of them might be reducible to others.)

    Maybe my pervasive pluralism rubs off from living in the vicinity of Stanford. (For those who don't recognize the reference, I'm referring to the so-called 'Stanford School of the philosophy of science'.)

    http://philosophy.ucsc.edu/news-events/colloquia-conferences/stanfordschoolphilosophyofscience.html
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2017
  12. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,291
    That could be it, I suppose. The use of the term "Scientific Method", with capital letters, is something I only came across after joining some of these forums after I retired. I was particularly baffled when someone directed me to a link in which a series of formal-looking steps were solemnly set out, with a flow scheme. It looked unbelievably Gradgrindian - reminiscent of that scene in the Dead Poets' Society with the graph of a poem's greatness etc.
     
    danshawen likes this.
  13. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,291
    I'd better take a look at that paper then.
     
    danshawen likes this.
  14. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,798
    I don't even recollect it in middle and high school science classes, which is where Rhett Allain claims it's tacked upon the walls like the Ten Commandments in a Bible school.

    But then scientism is something I never encountered back then, either. Even in the sense of any one instructor during their brief departures into personal views hawking a totalitarian science orientation that would save the world from theism / creationism, idiot politicians, capitalism, racism, "feminist pseudoscience", philosophy, or whatever assorted sometimes self-conflicting bogeymen the unofficial members of such a school of thought would worry over in their insomniac bouts at night (which global genuflection to the Holy Method would ward off).
    • "Scientism is a term used to describe the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or the most valuable part of human learning—to the exclusion of other viewpoints." --Scientism

    - - -
     
  15. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    Sure but science isn't restricted to physics , algorithm , numbers , abstract objects of mathematics , QM , biology , microbiology , geology , weather etc .

    Science is also about the unknown , NDE , and the afterlife . Which both have thousands of examples that people experience both . Both of which should be investigated more .
     
  16. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,732
    Experiences aren't necessarily experiences of the thing being reported. NDEs have been studied, and there is no reliable evidence that they are real.
     
  17. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    Why do you say this ? What is deemed " not reliable evidence " , to conclude that they are not real experiences ?
     
  18. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,217
    NO NO NO and just to be clear NO

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    danshawen likes this.
  19. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    Agreed

    But science is about the unknown .
     
  20. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,217
    Unknown YES

    Unknown Woo Woo NO NO

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    danshawen likes this.
  21. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    Unknown woo-woo .LOL .

    OH please such ....unknown .
     
  22. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,732
    For one thing, these people are experiencing extreme states of mind, and therefore cannot be a reliable witness. They experience lack of oxygen in some cases. Their reporting is not specific. You can say you see the doctors, but anyone can imagine a doctor. Some doctors have used an electronic display to show a number in a place the patient cannot see. No one has ever reported seeing that exact number. No one has reported any information that they could not have otherwise known or guessed.
     
  23. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    NDE why does extreme states of mind equates to unreliable witness ?

    http://iands.org/ndes/nde-stories/17-nde-accounts-from-beyond-the-light.html

    http://ndestories.org
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2017

Share This Page