Gary, list: you said: "It is not scientists who are trained specifically to provide analyses of scientific method."
It may not solely be philosophers, either. Best, Jerry R On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Gary Richmond <[email protected]> wrote: > List, > > I found this very short provocative essay of interest. > http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/04/opinion/there-is-no-scientific-method.html?ref=opinion > > The author's conclusion: > > If scientific method is only one form of a general method employed in all > human inquiry, how is it that the results of science are more reliable than > what is provided by these other forms? I think the answer is that science > deals with highly quantified variables and that it is the precision of its > results that supplies this reliability. But make no mistake: Quantified > precision is not to be confused with a superior method of thinking. > > I am not a practicing scientist. So who am I to criticize scientists’ > understanding of their method? > > I would turn this question around. Scientific method is not itself an > object of study for scientists, but it is an object of study for > philosophers of science. It is not scientists who are trained specifically > to provide analyses of scientific method. > > James Blachowicz <http://www.luc.edu/philosophy/faculty_blachowicz.shtml> is > a professor emeritus of philosophy at Loyola University Chicago and the > author of “Of Two Minds: The Nature of Inquiry > <http://www.sunypress.edu/p-2705-of-two-minds.aspx>” and “Essential > Difference: Toward a Metaphysics of Emergence > <http://www.sunypress.edu/p-5374-essential-difference.aspx>.” > Best, > > Gary R > > > > [image: Gary Richmond] > > *Gary Richmond* > *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* > *Communication Studies* > *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* > *C 745* > *718 482-5690 <718%20482-5690>* > > > ----------------------------- > PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON > PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to > [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L > but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the > BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm > . > > > > > >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
