rss

Tag: "scientific method"

1

Elephant’s Wings

PZ Myers has produced a parable; an updating of the ancient saga of the Blind Men and the Elephant. The gist of every version of this tale is that several blind explorers each encounter one point on an elephant, and decide from that point what the whole must be. PZ presents a version with an intractable dissenting opinion among those considered as experts.

After their consternation at their initial dissimilar conclusions about the true nature of an elephant,

The first three, being of a scientifical bent, quickly collaborated and changed places, and confirmed each other’s observations; they agreed that each had been correct in the results of their investigations, except that there wasn’t a hint of feathers anywhere about, but clearly their interpretations required correction and more data. So they explored further, reporting to each other what they were finding, in order to establish a more complete picture of the obstacle in the path.

“Feathers?” you ask. The fourth had suggested that it simply must have iridescent, transcendent wings. So as the others checked their evidence, he:

yawns and stretches in the shade of a tree. “It has wings, large wings, that it may ascend into the heavens and inspire humanity. There could be no purpose to such an animal without an ability to loft a metaphor and give us something to which we might aspire.”

The disagreements between those who explore and those who are sure, escalate. A worthy short read.

35

What is special about science?

Science isn’t about a particular batch of results. Science is special because of the way in which it gets those results. The following is from a well-written essay in the NYT entitled, “Elevating Science, Elevating Democracy“:

Science is not a monument of received Truth but something that people do to look for truth.

That endeavor, which has transformed the world in the last few centuries, does indeed teach values. Those values, among others, are honesty, doubt, respect for evidence, openness, accountability and tolerance and indeed hunger for opposing points of view.

1

How pseudo-science beats science

How does pseudo-science “beat” science?  I’m still thinking this through, but here is where I am at the moment.  Here are three steps often employed by pseudo-scientists:
Step I: Claim that honest work done by careful scientists is not credible without having any appreciation of the intense and meticulous work done by the scientists to come [...]

17

Proposed change to DI comment policy re: scientific method and evolution

Topic:  Proposed change to comment policy concerning ill-informed comments regarding A) the scientific method and B) evolution by natural selection.
At DI, we’ve had a wide-open comment policy.  Until recently, I have rarely rejected comments.  The ones I have rejected consisted mostly of preaching (see the current comment policy).  I’ve also rejected a few ad hominem [...]

109
Why Choose Naturalist Explanations Over Biblical Creation?

Why Choose Naturalist Explanations Over Biblical Creation?

Discussions in the comment sections of many posts on this site chaotically tend toward the strange attractor of one generally off-topic issue: Why does Creation/Evolution seem correct to you? It is usually a discussion between Creationists who believe that the scientific conclusions are based on faith, and Naturalists who believe that the Scientific Method is [...]