Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!ll-xn!cit-vax!tybalt.caltech.edu!myers
From: myers@tybalt.caltech.edu (Bob Myers)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: What is a methodology
Message-ID: <3692@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Date: Wed, 19-Aug-87 21:34:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: cit-vax.3692
Posted: Wed Aug 19 21:34:04 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 22-Aug-87 06:09:25 EDT
References: <850@klipper.cs.vu.nl>
Sender: news@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu
Reply-To: myers@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (Bob Myers)
Distribution: world
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Lines: 27

In article <850@klipper.cs.vu.nl> biep@cs.vu.nl (J. A. "Biep" Durieux) writes:
>
>- how and when to build hypotheses ("how" includes: with which forms
>       of reasoning)

Where I had problems with your initial comments (way back when) was
your statement science is not creative: in particular, that the
methodology tells you what hypotheses to consider. (Sorry, I can't quote.)

The statement quoted above is the closest thing I found to that
earlier comment, but I think it differs in important ways. "How"
is not the same as "what". Hypotheses don't have to be built from
reasoning, either.

Science is not a mechanistic, but a human endeavor. One doesn't go
blindly following methodology and come up with full-blown theories.
Creativity, most especially in the formation of hypotheses (personal
opinion), is a very important part of science.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
		Well if that's the best there is
		 Then I won't buy it
		Well if that's the only game
		 Then I won't play

Bob Myers                                         myers@tybalt.caltech.edu
			 {rutgers,amdahl}!cit-vax!tybalt.caltech.edu!myers