The Scientific Method is a Myth

[Sean Hayden]

It’s probably best to get the bad news out of the way first. The so-called scientific method is a myth. That is not to say that scientists don’t do things that can be described and are unique to their fields of study. But to squeeze a diverse set of practices that span cultural anthropology, paleobotany, and theoretical physics into a handful of steps is an inevitable distortion and, to be blunt, displays a serious poverty of imagination. Easy to grasp, pocket-guide versions of the scientific method usually reduce to critical thinking, checking facts, or letting “nature speak for itself,” none of which is really all that uniquely scientific. If typical formulations were accurate, the only location true science would be taking place in would be grade-school classrooms.

...

Now for the good news. The scientific method is nothing but a piece of rhetoric. Granted, that may not appear to be good news at first, but it actually is. The scientific method as rhetoric is far more complex, interesting, and revealing than it is as a direct reflection of the ways scientists work. Rhetoric is not just words; rather, “just” words are powerful tools to help shape perception, manage the flow of resources and authority, and make certain kinds of actions or beliefs possible or impossible. That’s particularly true of what Raymond Williams called “keywords.” A list of modern-day keywords include “family,” “race,” “freedom,” and “science.” Such words are familiar, repeated again and again until it seems that everyone must know what they mean. At the same time, scratch their surface, and their meanings become full of messiness, variation, and contradiction.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/ ... _Gg1_ZFymS

[Brian Peacock]

Hmm. Seems to me that 'the scientific method' is too easily confused for a singular or particular 'method' when really it's a context-dependent approach to epistemological enquiry which necessitates the development of robust methodologies.

[Rum]

There is also the question of disciplines which aren't strictly 'science'. Archeology, sociology and the like come to mind. They might try to bring order to a set of available information but they aren't capable, generally speaking' of producing predictable, repeatable results.

[rainbow]

Hmm. Seems to me that 'the scientific method' is too easily confused for a singular or particular 'method' when really it's a context-dependent approach to epistemological enquiry which necessitates the development of robust methodologies.

This involves a bucket and a stopwatch.
If different researchers get the same result within a margin of error, that error can be measured and statistically manipulated.

[JimC]

...but it sure beats predictions based on the entrails of sacrificed animals...

[rainbow]

...but it sure beats predictions based on the entrails of sacrificed animals...

...or meta-analysis.

[Hermit]

Well, reading that article was a waste of time. Apparently it is chapter 26 of a book titled Newton's Apple and Other Myths about Science, which is squarely aimed at the unwashed masses with aspirations to educate themselves but little of the grey matter necessary to succeed. The author did not write anything about why scientific method is a myth. He just listed quotes of people who wrote that it was. HUP should be ashamed for publishing such waffle, but then Harvard University is an American university, and American universities have a keen eye for making money.

[Tero]

Why would we need a scientific method? The Great Flood and and Noah’s Ark explain everything!

[cronus]

Say the same about mathematics. It's been in a foundational crisis since the start of the 20th C and things ain't getting better despite the modern world depending upon it.

[Rum]

Maths works and that is fine. If one just treats it as a tool and does stuff with it, then it is just dandy. The fact that nobody knows if maths is actually part of the fabric of the universe in some way or simply a very clever measuring stick invented by ape humans doesn't really matter, except for the pure mathematicians.

[JimC]

Cue me ranting that it is indeed part of the fabric of the universe, followed by snide remarks from Hermit...

[rainbow]

Cue me ranting that it is indeed part of the fabric of the universe, followed by snide remarks from Hermit...

That is what they want you to believe.

[Tero]

Math is just fake science. It lacks units of measurement.

[laklak]

It's a construct of the Patriarchy.

[Hermit]

Cue me ranting that it is indeed part of the fabric of the universe, followed by snide remarks from Hermit...