The Scientific Method: A Thing of the Past?
posted by Benjamin Bongstein | August 5, 2010
- Login or register to post comments
- Print this page
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Propeller
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
IcerocketThe scientific method is something we all probably remember from junior high or elementary school, whenever we learned it. Create a hypothesis, test it out, get results, explain the results, try and replicate results.
If an experiment or a discovery didn't fit within that approach, it wasn't considered science.
However, science as I understand it isn't about PROVING anything but about discovering what's already there in our reality. Scientists name tons of shit after themselves when they discover it, because as far as we're concerned they INVENTED whatever they discovered, because it had previously been unknown (presumably).
If you make a discovery outside of using the scientific method, then what use does it have? In my opinion, the use the scientific method has is for *verifying* discoveries with other scientists. It's a method of verification.
On certain subjects, the scientific community can become decidedly heated. What's dark matter? How do we cure AIDS? Is there a force akin to god? Where does consciousness or awareness come from?
The answers, as they say, are out there. Regardless of what we believe, assert, or profess, the truths of science remain waiting to be discovered. We see lightning plenty of the time, but can you imagine a primitive human's reaction to a tesla coil? Who could have known such beautiful and dangerous forces were just waiting to be found.
My point, and the reason why I was thinking on this subject, was that many people often come at things like spirituality and religion with a scientific approach. If someone has a mystical experience, a skeptic might ask to have it repeated to verify it. And if it isn't repeatable, well then it wasn't science, it didn't happen, or it was just some curious abnormality.
So, is the scientific method a thing of the past? That's for you to decide. I don't see it going anywhere in terms of being a method for verification of hypothesis. But when it comes to exploring new subjects like awareness, perhaps science could use also use a new approach.
It's like science wants to sleep with god but can't figure out how to unhook her bra. Noob.
Comments
I like Ken Wilber's concept
— Aug 06, 2010
I like Ken Wilber's concept of the cultural meme. (see Brief Theory of Everything - part of the integral approach) We are in general going through a period where three meme's dominate culture. Religious, Scientific and Green (or environmental). The problem is both Sci an green are dominated by the Sci Method. With vastly different drives towards actions and conclusions.
Everyone tries to proove everything one way or another, because Science has done a good job at succeeding in the area of technological growth. But the dark side is there as well.
I like, as an upper teir thinker, (beyond green) to use all paradigms to look at any situation or issue. It keeps me fluid and open to things I may be missing. But this upper teir is a very small portion of the energetic field of our awareness. But we are headed there...
Being in Freedom
Most Discoveries are but Rediscoveries
— Aug 06, 2010
The mathematical zero ... gravity .. pasteurization ... all were known of thousands of years previous to the modern/western versions of "finding out" {in the Vedic culture of pre-Hindhu India} ... along with so many other things.
... Leave out enough evidence ... and widen the margin of error enough ... and one can prove/disprove anything.
Analyses only determines one's previous state of not knowing relative to self-determined standards of measurement.
Does measuring distance determine distance ... measuring time determine time.
The very word "prove" literally means only to "please" ... we please ourselves with the descriptions of observation we choose.
In modern Quantum thought .. this is all they realize at the end of the empirical rainbow ...
... wave or particle ... spirit or matter .. 'tis but the observer ones self who is in flux.
Modern Zeitgeist...
— Aug 06, 2010
Could the objective observer be but another archetype defending itself from it's own subjective experience? I find it curious how this archetype rarely if ever applies the scientific method to itself.
"Seek not abroad, turn back into thyself, for in the inner man dwells the truth..."
Enantiodromia: The Process
— Aug 08, 2010
Enantiodromia: The Process by which something is transformed or revealed as being the same as it's opposite.
What is science really? At it's very core science is about prophecy much of which depends on the miracle of the 'Big Bang'.
Fiction explaining fiction.
"Let us measure the world and observe the past to foresee and predict the future", says science.
"Give us an inch and we'll take you a mile", says science.
"Seek not abroad, turn back into thyself, for in the inner man dwells the truth..."
SIDDHIS
— Aug 06, 2010
Siddhi is a sanskrit word with a variety of meanings, sometimes translated as 'perfection'.
When the term is used, it is often to describe special powers that a spiritual aspirant has achieved on their path. It is always warned never to get focused on siddhis because they will distract you from the Real Goal, which is self-realization.
There have been many people to witness these miracles. Some are more believable than others. In Yogananda's Autobiography of a Yogi, he claims to have witnessed people being brought back to life.
Other things like defying gravity, teleportation, and even manifesting physical structures (like a fruit) out of nothingness.
I haven't seen any, as far as I am aware, so I can't say whether or not I know they're real. But I think they are.
So what if they ARE real and the scientific method disproves them? Where does that leave science? Where does it leave spirituality?
repeating
— Aug 06, 2010
I think the scientific method like any method is valid if it's serves it purpose... I see your point on the skeptic mind negating " so to speak" any experience out of that... but I think you are forgetting about psychoanalysis, psychiatry,etc like you mentioned scientist's are now debating about nebulous things such as dark matter, dark energy, multiverse (michio kaku anyone) ...
Something might be just perception (like social patterns) an others are just what they are (gravity)...
So I repeat the scientific method is great valuable method on discovering or "uncovering" the forces that mold this planet and the universe... repetition is not such a bad thing after all... right? you wouldn't want the cycle of water to stop from... repeating...
SeRgIo
