U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-17-2011, 06:56 PM
 
Location: Toronto, ON
2,333 posts, read 2,442,246 times
Reputation: 258

Advertisements

As the scientific method is performed, hypotheses are by assumption either in the infinite development of being required for the research or at resolution for other hypotheses. I think that that is either the theoretical body for factual discussion from reading or the practical realized form for a test or experiment of the facts. The law for my thinking goes into the finite contention of theories which have been proven, and which we can further prove (I guess) in the .... hey, the circle of life. That I mean as the new way of philosophy of science for plausible Nature. Huh??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-17-2011, 06:57 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,426 posts, read 5,569,083 times
Reputation: 1760
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgnostic View Post
As the scientific method is performed, hypotheses are by assumption either in the infinite development of being required for the research or at resolution for other hypotheses. I think that that is either the theoretical body for factual discussion from reading or the practical realized form for a test or experiment of the facts. The law for my thinking goes into the finite contention of theories which have been proven, and which we can further prove (I guess) in the .... hey, the circle of life. That I mean as the new way of philosophy of science for plausible Nature. Huh??
Exactly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 06:58 PM
 
19,081 posts, read 21,194,953 times
Reputation: 13392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxcar Overkill View Post
He said that not all hypothesis lends itself to testing by the scientific method. It's just a recognition that the scientific method isn't well suited to all types of questions.
I understand that, I'm just not sure why that is the case. How can a scientific hypothesis not be testable? If it's not, then to me it just becomes an idea or layman explanation, not a hypothesis. As disclaimer, I might be looking at this in a simplistic and biased way based on my own work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 07:08 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,426 posts, read 5,569,083 times
Reputation: 1760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
I understand that, I'm just not sure why that is the case. How can a scientific hypothesis not be testable? If it's not, then to me it just becomes an idea or layman explanation, not a hypothesis. As disclaimer, I might be looking at this in a simplistic and biased way based on my own work.
You keep adding the word "scientific" in front of hypothesis, which he did not do. Not all questions are scientific questions.

For example: Does the 2nd Amendment protect the private right of gun ownership? The Scientific question wouldn't get you far in answering that question. It would be far better to use legal research methods, rather than scientific research methods.

Example 2: What is the meaning of Beethoven's "Ode to Joy?" Scientific Method won't help you much on that one either.

There are many questions that the scientific method is well suited to answer. But many others are not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 07:13 PM
 
19,081 posts, read 21,194,953 times
Reputation: 13392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxcar Overkill View Post
You keep adding the word "scientific" in front of hypothesis, which he did not do. Not all questions are scientific questions.

For example: Does the 2nd Amendment protect the private right of gun ownership? The Scientific question wouldn't get you far in answering that question. It would be far better to use legal research methods, rather than scientific research methods.

Example 2: What is the meaning of Beethoven's "Ode to Joy?" Scientific Method won't help you much on that one either.

There are many questions that the scientific method is well suited to answer. But many others are not.
I understand that not all questions are scientific questions, but the title of this thread is the Scientific Method. The OP listed common scientific terms that comprise the scientific method. I'm not sure why these terms should be addressed as non-scientific terms. eh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 07:23 PM
 
Location: Toronto, ON
2,333 posts, read 2,442,246 times
Reputation: 258
These problems come from the faith of historical cultural adventure. I suppose the islam faith claims to transcend time for the meaning of where these adventures occurred. IN christianity the adventure is progressively realized for the scientist... or mystic?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 07:24 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,426 posts, read 5,569,083 times
Reputation: 1760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
I understand that not all questions are scientific questions, but the title of this thread is the Scientific Method. The OP listed common scientific terms that comprise the scientific method. I'm not sure why these terms should be addressed as non-scientific terms. eh.
Because we were also talking about the limitations of the SM. So he said:

Quote:
That depends on the nature of the hypothesis. Not every hypothesis lends itself to testing or confirmation via the SM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 07:27 PM
 
Location: Toronto, ON
2,333 posts, read 2,442,246 times
Reputation: 258
Oh well, I'm by-passing the ramble for discovering the human nature of conception and imagination.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 07:38 PM
 
19,081 posts, read 21,194,953 times
Reputation: 13392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxcar Overkill View Post
Because we were also talking about the limitations of the SM. So he said:

That depends on the nature of the hypothesis. Not every hypothesis lends itself to testing or confirmation via the SM.
I suppose this is just a matter of semantics, like the term theory, which is defined quite differently in and outside of science. A scientific hypothesis should always lend to testing, which is one of the reasons science works. Further, discussions about a layman hypothesis doesn't really address the limitations of the SM since it's not a discussion about science to begin with. It's saying that science is limited because it's science and not something else. To be clear, I don't think science is the only approach in life, but if folk are going to discuss it, I don't see the value in redefining the terms given the context of the OP. He took a list of terms and made one of them layman and left the rest as scientific under the OPs inquiry about the SM. Sorry, but that's nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 08:23 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,426 posts, read 5,569,083 times
Reputation: 1760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
I suppose this is just a matter of semantics, like the term theory, which is defined quite differently in and outside of science. A scientific hypothesis should always lend to testing, which is one of the reasons science works. Further, discussions about a layman hypothesis doesn't really address the limitations of the SM since it's not a discussion about science to begin with. It's saying that science is limited because it's science and not something else. To be clear, I don't think science is the only approach in life, but if folk are going to discuss it, I don't see the value in redefining the terms given the context of the OP. He took a list of terms and made one of them layman and left the rest as scientific under the OPs inquiry about the SM. Sorry, but that's nonsense.
This is the Religion and Philosophy section of city data, not the Science section. If the discussion were as simple as you are making it out to be, this whole thread would be off-topic.

But it's not off topic, because there are some implications of what is being discussed that are implied, but perhaps would be better understood if made more explicit.

We are discussing the limitations of the scientific method as a tool of rational inquiry into questions related to religion, and even the questions regarding the origins of everything. Some are acknowledging the power of the scientific method, while they are also acknowledging it's limitations.

When the OP asked about the weaknesses of the SM, we are pointing out that it is not a flaw in the processes involved in the SM that is the primary limitation, rather it is simply the fact that many religious questions are not a suitable subject matter for scientific inquiry. The scientific method is not well designed to answer at least some of those questions.

By-the-by, the alternatives to the scientific method aren't limited to layman methods. There's also the field of philosophy, which is another tool in the tool box of rational methods of inquiry. There is also religion, for what it's worth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top