Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!mcvax!botter!klipper!biep
From: biep@cs.vu.nl (J. A. "Biep" Durieux)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: What is a methodology
Message-ID: <850@klipper.cs.vu.nl>
Date: Wed, 12-Aug-87 06:47:32 EDT
Article-I.D.: klipper.850
Posted: Wed Aug 12 06:47:32 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 14-Aug-87 04:44:21 EDT
Reply-To: biep@cs.vu.nl (J. A. "Biep" Durieux)
Distribution: world
Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam
Lines: 81

Finally there is my promised article.

I don't think I can give a rigorous definition of "methodology", neither of
the discipline, nor of the product. Nevertheless I will give a try, perhaps
there are any takers..

A methodology is a set of rules that (in the ideal case) determine the
conduct of a scientist following it in the face of the facts and currect
hypotheses and theories of the (scientific) discipline the methodology
(and the scientist) is about.

That for the abstract point of view. Bob Myers asked me to describe a
methodology for some actual science. I do not have the knowledge to do
so (I do not know when to resort to experiment, etc), but I will try
to describe the form of some of the rules of conduct that a methodology
(for many sciences) will have:

There are rules, stating:

- how to state facts
- how to order facts, givens
- how to relate them and how to find relationships
- how to class them
- how to define concepts (and how to determine, from the facts,
	which concepts), and when
- how to do systematics (to relate concepts, to make super-concepts, etc.)
- how to build a taxonomy
- how to choose a terminology
- how to choose a notation, and when to look for another one
- how to describe facts
- how to localize "holes" in our knowledge ("important" holes, that is)
- how and when to try to gather new facts (e.g. observation, introspection,
	(controlled) experiment), and what sort of new facts
- how to decide what to observe (so that the result will be useful)
- how to make an observation (e.g. "try to minimize the interference of the
	observer with the observed (observee?)", "if possible, do some more
	observations than you strictly need - probably it's cheaper (in terms
	of time, money, whatever) to do them now than to do them apart later
	on")
- how to introspect (perhaps not used in natural sciences?)
- how to set up an experiment
- how to interpret the results of an observation
- how and when to build hypotheses ("how" includes: with which forms
	of reasoning)
- when to use which form(s) of reasoning (logic(s), math, statistics,
	induction, abduction, heuristic rules, dialectics(?))
- how to describe rules, how to check the adequacy of the description
- how to check hypotheses (e.g. confront with facts (both known and new ones),
	choose these facts to cover as broad a spectrum as possible)
- how to value hypotheses (e.g. complexity vs. explanative power, predictive
	power, form compared with "related" hypotheses, falsifiability)
- when and how to adapt hypotheses
- when to reject hypotheses
- how to choose between hypotheses (e.g. Occams razor)
- when to introduce "hidden causes"
- when to try to build a theory
- how to describe a theory
- how to check the adequacy of a description (e.g. could I turn this
	algorithm into a program - the now-possible check of several
	psychological theories)
- how and when to check, value, adapt, expand, restrict, reject theories
- how and when to spit off sub-disciplines
- how and when to merge fields (e.g. some day chemistry might turn into
	physics)


Undoubtedly there will be many more aspects to a methodology, but I hope
this makes somewhat clear what I mean by the word. If people either want
to extend this list, or to fill in some "real" rules, by all means do so,
It will probably be very useful for my PhD project! (Cooperative planning
and problem solving, including learning, theory formation, etc.)

One might wish to add "practical methodology":
- how, when and where to apply for money
- how to decide which colleagues to trust (i.e. to accept their theories, etc.
	without checking them)
- how often and when to rest
- how much, and in which direction, to specialise
-- 
						Biep.  (biep@cs.vu.nl via mcvax)
	To be the question or not to be the question, that is.