more from this thinker
|
more from this text
Single Idea 6804
[filed under theme 14. Science / B. Scientific Theories / 1. Scientific Theory
]
Full Idea
I find little concurrence as to what scientific method might actually be - the reason being, I conclude, that there is no such thing.
Gist of Idea
There is no agreement on scientific method - because there is no such thing
Source
Alexander Bird (Philosophy of Science [1998], Ch.8)
Book Ref
Bird,Alexander: 'Philosophy of Science' [UCL Press 2000], p.259
A Reaction
I take the essence of science to be two things: first, becoming very fussy about empirical evidence; second, setting up controlled conditions to get at the evidence that seems to be needed. I agree that there seems to be no distinctive way of thinking.
Related Idea
Idea 20270
There is no one scientific method; we must try many approaches, and many emotions [Nietzsche]
The
39 ideas
with the same theme
[a generalised explanation of natural events]:
16971
|
Plato says sciences are unified around Forms; Aristotle says they're unified around substance
[Aristotle, by Moravcsik]
|
19594
|
General statements about nature are not valid
[Novalis]
|
22363
|
You have only begun to do real science when you can express it in numbers
[Kelvin]
|
14766
|
Duns Scotus offers perhaps the best logic and metaphysics for modern physical science
[Peirce]
|
19225
|
I classify science by level of abstraction; principles derive from above, and data from below
[Peirce]
|
20270
|
There is no one scientific method; we must try many approaches, and many emotions
[Nietzsche]
|
16882
|
The building blocks contain the whole contents of a discipline
[Frege]
|
14433
|
Mathematically expressed propositions are true of the world, but how to interpret them?
[Russell]
|
18699
|
Carnap tried to define all scientific predicates in terms of primitive relations, using type theory
[Carnap, by Button]
|
21687
|
It seems obvious to prefer the simpler of two theories, on grounds of beauty and convenience
[Quine]
|
21688
|
There are four suspicious reasons why we prefer simpler theories
[Quine]
|
4630
|
Two theories can be internally consistent and match all the facts, yet be inconsistent with one another
[Quine, by Baggini /Fosl]
|
6809
|
Kuhn came to accept that all scientists agree on a particular set of values
[Kuhn, by Bird]
|
15882
|
Since there are three different dimensions for generalising laws, no one system of logic can cover them
[Harré]
|
4958
|
Identities like 'heat is molecule motion' are necessary (in the highest degree), not contingent
[Kripke]
|
15286
|
Clavius's Paradox: purely syntactic entailment theories won't explain, because they are too profuse
[Harré/Madden]
|
15283
|
Simplicity can sort theories out, but still leaves an infinity of possibilities
[Harré/Madden]
|
15316
|
The powers/natures approach has been so successful (for electricity, magnetism, gravity) it may be universal
[Harré/Madden]
|
8054
|
Social sciences discover no law-like generalisations, and tend to ignore counterexamples
[MacIntyre]
|
3865
|
Why should it matter whether or not a theory is scientific?
[Newton-Smith]
|
17503
|
Theories can never represent accurately, because their components are abstract
[Cartwright,N, by Portides]
|
2458
|
Theories are links in the causal chain between the environment and our beliefs
[Fodor]
|
16827
|
If we make a hypothesis about data, then a deduction, where does the hypothesis come from?
[Lipton]
|
7021
|
If the world is theory-dependent, the theories themselves can't be theory-dependent
[Heil]
|
17601
|
Neither a priori rationalism nor sense data empiricism account for scientific knowledge
[Thagard]
|
8457
|
The Principle of Conservatism says we should violate the minimum number of background beliefs
[Orenstein]
|
6805
|
Relativity ousted Newtonian mechanics despite a loss of simplicity
[Bird]
|
6777
|
Realists say their theories involve truth and the existence of their phenomena
[Bird]
|
6804
|
There is no agreement on scientific method - because there is no such thing
[Bird]
|
19652
|
How can we mathematically describe a world that lacks humans?
[Meillassoux]
|
19091
|
Seeing reality mathematically makes it an object of thought, not of experience
[Macbeth]
|
22182
|
Theories with unobservables are underdetermined by the evidence
[Okasha]
|
18614
|
Vertical arguments say eliminate a term if it picks out different natural kinds in different theories
[Machery]
|
18615
|
Horizontal arguments say eliminate a term if it fails to pick out a natural kind
[Machery]
|
18616
|
If a term doesn't pick out a kind, keeping it may block improvements in classification
[Machery]
|
22192
|
Is Newton simpler with universal simultaneity, or Einstein simpler without absolute time?
[Gorham]
|
22194
|
Structural Realism says mathematical structures persist after theory rejection
[Gorham]
|
22195
|
Structural Realists must show the mathematics is both crucial and separate
[Gorham]
|
22136
|
Science begins with sufficient reason, de-animation, and the importance of nature
[Boulter]
|