Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: The Right's Science Problem Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_rights_science_problem#17646 Post contents: pb, From one point of view one could say that there is a scientific method, defined by submission to logic (at least ideally). This rule is too general though, all argumentation has to have this intention at its base. I agree that scientists, when at work, use certain methods, that are meant to maximize the consistency of their arguments. On the other hand what makes a scientific argument valid is actually a rather complex question over which philosophers of science have argued for centuries. I think Feyerabend in his book "Against method" gives a good overview through the example of Galilei, but going through comparisons of empiricism, rationalism and so on. His conclusion is that it was not necessarily GAlilei's science (in the modern sense of the term) that gives powers to his arguments in the end, but many other factors that seem to have nothing to do with a scientific method (rhetorical style, taking advantage of certain historical circumstances, etc.). So perhaps it is better to say that there is a scientific method, but it is hard to pin down all its aspects and give a concrete definition of what it is. Which actually means that scientists themselves do not necessarily have a monopoly on it. Sent at: 2008 07 24