I said > > >Wish it were so. Most people still think a scientific theory is an >>unproven idea. The there are those who think that if there is a one >>time single point correlation it's a proven fact. Others listen to >>cultural dicta without questioning them. > >
And Guido replied > >And then, there are those who don't want to understand that a scientific >theory _by definition_ is an unproven idea. If it were proved, it would >not be a theory any more. > >May I please politely refer you to your English language dictionary. I >have the Longman "Dictionary of English language and culture" at hand: >page 1371: >"theory: a reasonable or scientifically acceptable explanation for a >fact or event, which has not been proved to be true" > I should have used the word untested rather than unproven. Oh, that word theory. >This word is employed by English writers in a very loose and >improper sense. It is with them usually convertible into hypothesis, >and hypothesis is commonly used as another term for conjecture. >Sir W Hamilton. In science the word theory means much more than an idea. >A theory is a scheme of the relations subsisting between the parts >of a systematic whole; an hypothesis is a tentative conjecture >respecting a cause of phenomena. Websters revised unabridged dictionary, 1996. When I started studying science (pre WWII) I was taught that one had an idea which one formulated as an hypothesis. This included defining ways to test the idea. If this confirmed the idea, and this test and others extrapolated from it continued to do so, and if the hypothesis then lead to other predictions which were similarly tested, then it became a theory and as so it embodied all the tested knowledge on the subject. It was not immutable, however, and was subject to modification to fit the 'facts'. If this continued to explain all the known phenomena on the subject it became a law. Thus we have the theory of relativity and the laws of thermodynamics and Newton's laws of motion...except that the theory of relativity has made it necessary to modify the laws. In common parlance the word theory is often taken to mean an untested conjecture. Thus we have those who question the theory of evolution because 'it is only a theory' (meaning it has not been tested). It was Bert's statement that >Nowadays we rely on the Scientific Method and place our faith >on the analysis of experimental data. that I was reacting to. Orhcidists, by and large, do not rely on scientific methods. Anybody who grows orchids can make an observation on orchid culture and generalize from it. Unless it is formulated as an hypothesis and is tested under controlled conditions the idea is suspect (though it may be true). Controlled experiments on orchid culture do exist but are the exception. I postulate that most of our cultural practices are suspect and many are myths. Fortunatly most orchids are very adaptable. Martin
_______________________________________________ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
