Gary R, list:
I shouldn’t simply be flip. I should try to figure out what Gary R’s intention was in forwarding that article. The question of “What is…” the scientific method is an old one. There aren’t any novel observations in that nytimes article to warrant taking the author any more seriously than others who have said the same thing. But what would Peirce say the scientific method is? In fact, he does say. He says it in different ways. So, what does he say? On the other hand, terms are used differently, which isn’t to say that they’re used differently different every time. There is regularity to the different ways terms are interchanged. For instance, see how “science” is used in the following: “Our description of the character of the *Politics* is manifestly provisional. “Common sense” as used in this description is understood in contradistinction to “science”, i.e. primarily modern natural science, and therewith presupposes “science” whereas the *Politics* itself does not presuppose “science.” We shall first attempt to reach a more adequate understanding of the *Politics* by considering the objections to which our contention is exposed.” ~Leo Strauss, The City and Man There are double meanings for other terms that belong in this conversation too, such as *justice* and *good *(c.f., Strauss, Benardete, *Republic*, *Symposium*). Best, Jerry R On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 <gary.richm...@gmail.com> > 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 >> peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L >> but to l...@list.iupui.edu 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 peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
