Here's my wise cousin Steve's response to my last blog about the scientific method:
Robin:
You question whether the scientific method can be used to examine Trump and his policies. The SM can’t be used to study an irrational process – except to show that it is irrational. I don’t really think that the SM can be used to test human motivations. You say Trump wants to be a dictator, but he is too old to matter. He wants more money, but he has more already than he can use. There is no benefit, so why does he pursue these things. Humans do things that don’t benefit themselves – or anyone else. People steal because they want something without paying for it – they benefit. People murder because someone is in their way or for revenge – they benefit. But – explain vandalism. People destroy things belonging to others – no one benefits. Vandalism isn’t logical. When I was going through puberty, I didn’t understand why the girls preferred the bad boys (who didn’t treat them with respect). They rejected the good boys. That is illogical unless somehow evolution created the preference (we’ve talked about this before). SM – opinion has no weight in the process. SM – unverified data is no data. SM – the testing has to be repeatable. SM – failure tells you something (trial and error). SM – when statistics are utilized they have to be used carefully-very carefully-very, very carefully. Your last sentence starts with IF. I don’t think as long as people try to take advantage over the other side – IF is possible. SM is about a fair, unbiassed process. Fair is subjective. All's fair in love and war. I liked your blog. Keep ‘em coming. We need more like that.
Steve
Comment:
Steve's comments abut my blog are a good example of "peer review," getting others' opinions, or critiques. I think it is one of the most valuable parts of the scientific method.
My wise cousin Steve is absolutely right. "The scientific method can't be used to evaluate an irrational process - except (he goes on to say) to show that it is irrational."
That was my point. That the first step in the SM is to make observations. If your data, observations are false, "opinion has no weight," and "unverified data is no data," then you can't go any farther with the SM. Maybe I was too liberal in calling my evaluation of Trump's actions SM. What I should have said was that it's important to realize that if you start with false data, your conclusions are false as well. I don't know why Trump does stuff, or why girls seem to like "bad boys," but I can still say that Trump's deployment of troops and girls hooking up with bad boys are mistakes, because their conclusions are based on false assumptions.
Also, we should all try not to try to "take advantage over the other side" by not listening to their arguments.
Robin
No comments:
Post a Comment