[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
"cargo cult" science
This seemed pertinent, from Carl Zimmer's blog:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2008/07/09/dawn-of-the-picasso-fish/
We must be certain that we are not engaging in what Feynman called âcargo
cult scienceâ.
http://wwwcdf.pd.infn.it/~loreti/science.html
(Whatâs missing from âcargo cult science is) âa kind of scientific
integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of
utter honesty â a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if youâre
doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it
invalid â not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could
possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that youâve
eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked â to make sure the
other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.
Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you
know them. You must do the best you can â if you know anything at all wrong,
or possibly wrong â to explain it. If you make a theory, for example, and
advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that
disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it. There is also a more
subtle problem. When you have put a lot of ideas together to make an elaborate
theory, you want to make sure, when explaining what it fits, that those things
it fits are not just the things that gave you the idea for the theory; but that
the finished theory makes something else come out right, in addition.
In summary, the idea is to give all of the information to help others to judge
the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads to
judgement in one particular direction or another. â
>>
I'm sure we've all be guilty of this to one degree or another. Something good
to remember, though.
It helps to send your unpublished manuscripts to your worst enemies -- if they
are kind or mean enough to furnish comments. Just sift through the snide,
thoughtless and rude criticisms to find at l
r point of view and, perhaps, a new direction or two to take your studies.
David Peters
davidpeters@att.net