brother Paul
Member
The following are not MY WORDS but a summation of perspectives on science that greatly influenced the way I see science and scientists. Is it incorrect for you? If so where and why? If not where and why?
Science is tentative and thus subject to change while SOME scientists are very resistant to change and sometimes interpret data in light of what they accept as theoretically true. This happens because empiricism is based largely on observation but often SOME scientists imaginatively infer possible conclusions based on popular paradigms in their time. Though new evidence and alternate inferences should always be objectively considered, often the accepted paradigm takes on the illusion of accepted or established truth despite history which shows that in some cases the paradigm changes and that science can indicate useful applicable information which later is considered obsolete.
Science isn’t simply the accumulation of observable evidence and the orderly gathering of knowledge. All observations require interpretation and inference by scientists. To do this, scientists require imagination and creativity to make inferential statements about what they see. In fact, imagination and creativity are needed in every aspect of a scientist’s work – making sense of observations, making the creative leap from data to possible explanation, coming up with new ideas, designing investigations and looking at old data in a new light, and then of course there is what Mayr calls the historical narrative attached which often takes on the tone of fact.
Creativity in research design (by the scientist, an outside intelligent force) can be seen in many research stories. These stories CAN and sometimes do challenge “the myth” that there is one universal way to do science, commonly referred to as ‘the scientific method’. The history of science shows that no single method can be used. Rather, there are often many ways to investigate the same problems in science and sometimes alternative explanations of what is meant by what is found
Scientists do strive to be objective, but it is just not possible to make truly objective observations and interpretations without any bias. A scientist’s mind is not a blank slate. Individual scientists have their prior knowledge, theoretical beliefs, experiences, cultural background, training, expectations and biases, each of which will affect their observations and conclusions. All observation is preceded by theory and conceptual knowledge. Science tries to overcome this lack of pure objectivity through the scientific community, which scrutinizes scientific work and helps balance individual scientists’ leanings.
All scientific knowledge is produced within a larger society and culture. This means that the social and cultural elements such as politics, economics, power structures, religion and philosophy will affect the science knowledge produced and how it is accepted. This also means that the direction and the products of science will be greatly influenced by the society and the culture in which the science is conducted. As societies change, so do scientific priorities.
Science is tentative and thus subject to change while SOME scientists are very resistant to change and sometimes interpret data in light of what they accept as theoretically true. This happens because empiricism is based largely on observation but often SOME scientists imaginatively infer possible conclusions based on popular paradigms in their time. Though new evidence and alternate inferences should always be objectively considered, often the accepted paradigm takes on the illusion of accepted or established truth despite history which shows that in some cases the paradigm changes and that science can indicate useful applicable information which later is considered obsolete.
Science isn’t simply the accumulation of observable evidence and the orderly gathering of knowledge. All observations require interpretation and inference by scientists. To do this, scientists require imagination and creativity to make inferential statements about what they see. In fact, imagination and creativity are needed in every aspect of a scientist’s work – making sense of observations, making the creative leap from data to possible explanation, coming up with new ideas, designing investigations and looking at old data in a new light, and then of course there is what Mayr calls the historical narrative attached which often takes on the tone of fact.
Creativity in research design (by the scientist, an outside intelligent force) can be seen in many research stories. These stories CAN and sometimes do challenge “the myth” that there is one universal way to do science, commonly referred to as ‘the scientific method’. The history of science shows that no single method can be used. Rather, there are often many ways to investigate the same problems in science and sometimes alternative explanations of what is meant by what is found
Scientists do strive to be objective, but it is just not possible to make truly objective observations and interpretations without any bias. A scientist’s mind is not a blank slate. Individual scientists have their prior knowledge, theoretical beliefs, experiences, cultural background, training, expectations and biases, each of which will affect their observations and conclusions. All observation is preceded by theory and conceptual knowledge. Science tries to overcome this lack of pure objectivity through the scientific community, which scrutinizes scientific work and helps balance individual scientists’ leanings.
All scientific knowledge is produced within a larger society and culture. This means that the social and cultural elements such as politics, economics, power structures, religion and philosophy will affect the science knowledge produced and how it is accepted. This also means that the direction and the products of science will be greatly influenced by the society and the culture in which the science is conducted. As societies change, so do scientific priorities.