more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 20270

[filed under theme 14. Science / B. Scientific Theories / 1. Scientific Theory ]

Full Idea

There is no one and only scientific method that leads to knowledge. We must proceed experimentally with things, be sometimes angry, sometimes affectionate towards them, and allow justice, passion, and coldness to follow one upon another.

Gist of Idea

There is no one scientific method; we must try many approaches, and many emotions

Source

Friedrich Nietzsche (Dawn (Daybreak) [1881], 432)

Book Ref

Nietzsche,Friedrich: 'Dawn (Daybreak) (v 5)', ed/tr. Smith, Brittain [Stanford 2011], p.224


A Reaction

Alexander Bird says the same thing in our time. I agree, but I think there is a core of controlled conditions and peer review.

Related Idea

Idea 6804 There is no agreement on scientific method - because there is no such thing [Bird]


The 39 ideas with the same theme [a generalised explanation of natural events]:

Plato says sciences are unified around Forms; Aristotle says they're unified around substance [Aristotle, by Moravcsik]
General statements about nature are not valid [Novalis]
You have only begun to do real science when you can express it in numbers [Kelvin]
Duns Scotus offers perhaps the best logic and metaphysics for modern physical science [Peirce]
I classify science by level of abstraction; principles derive from above, and data from below [Peirce]
There is no one scientific method; we must try many approaches, and many emotions [Nietzsche]
The building blocks contain the whole contents of a discipline [Frege]
Mathematically expressed propositions are true of the world, but how to interpret them? [Russell]
Carnap tried to define all scientific predicates in terms of primitive relations, using type theory [Carnap, by Button]
It seems obvious to prefer the simpler of two theories, on grounds of beauty and convenience [Quine]
There are four suspicious reasons why we prefer simpler theories [Quine]
Two theories can be internally consistent and match all the facts, yet be inconsistent with one another [Quine, by Baggini /Fosl]
Kuhn came to accept that all scientists agree on a particular set of values [Kuhn, by Bird]
Since there are three different dimensions for generalising laws, no one system of logic can cover them [Harré]
Identities like 'heat is molecule motion' are necessary (in the highest degree), not contingent [Kripke]
Clavius's Paradox: purely syntactic entailment theories won't explain, because they are too profuse [Harré/Madden]
Simplicity can sort theories out, but still leaves an infinity of possibilities [Harré/Madden]
The powers/natures approach has been so successful (for electricity, magnetism, gravity) it may be universal [Harré/Madden]
Social sciences discover no law-like generalisations, and tend to ignore counterexamples [MacIntyre]
Why should it matter whether or not a theory is scientific? [Newton-Smith]
Theories can never represent accurately, because their components are abstract [Cartwright,N, by Portides]
Theories are links in the causal chain between the environment and our beliefs [Fodor]
If we make a hypothesis about data, then a deduction, where does the hypothesis come from? [Lipton]
If the world is theory-dependent, the theories themselves can't be theory-dependent [Heil]
Neither a priori rationalism nor sense data empiricism account for scientific knowledge [Thagard]
The Principle of Conservatism says we should violate the minimum number of background beliefs [Orenstein]
Relativity ousted Newtonian mechanics despite a loss of simplicity [Bird]
Realists say their theories involve truth and the existence of their phenomena [Bird]
There is no agreement on scientific method - because there is no such thing [Bird]
How can we mathematically describe a world that lacks humans? [Meillassoux]
Seeing reality mathematically makes it an object of thought, not of experience [Macbeth]
Theories with unobservables are underdetermined by the evidence [Okasha]
If a term doesn't pick out a kind, keeping it may block improvements in classification [Machery]
Vertical arguments say eliminate a term if it picks out different natural kinds in different theories [Machery]
Horizontal arguments say eliminate a term if it fails to pick out a natural kind [Machery]
Is Newton simpler with universal simultaneity, or Einstein simpler without absolute time? [Gorham]
Structural Realism says mathematical structures persist after theory rejection [Gorham]
Structural Realists must show the mathematics is both crucial and separate [Gorham]
Science begins with sufficient reason, de-animation, and the importance of nature [Boulter]