The Most Important Part of Science

[putongren]

What is the most important part of science? Math, Theories, Experiment, Etc...?

I'll paraphrase what a friend's answer.

"Process ... the rest of what you said changes -but the process above it all (which comes from how to think about things) is what determines the quality of reiteration and refinement."

I thought about this question and I thought that a scientist's interpretation of experiment is the crux of science.

Any thoughts? Comments?

 

[Academic]

Doubt

 

[Dr Lots-o'watts]

Objectivity.

 

[Trexman89]

Not getting mad when your stuff breaks or you screw up your computations.

 

[Acut]

Thinking.
We wouldn't go far without it.

 

[Pythagorean]

Important to who? Mankind or particular scientists?

 

[Klockan3]

The most important is reproducibility. The notion is that if a result can't be reproduced it is worthless. If someone gives you a bit of scientific information you can go and test it yourself, this is the most important aspect of science.

Then I have faith in those who do experiments and prefer theory myself, but that do not mean that I don't recognize how important they are for the whole structure. I love reading about experiments done but actually doing them is a snooze fest.

 

[Danger]

I'm very tempted to say ***s. After all, biology is dependent upon them, if only to make interesting posters. Were it not for them, all of the pioneers of science would have starved to death as infants. I bet that a lot of early scientists made it through school by the grace of a sheep and dreams of Marie Curie.
Hell, I think of her now and then myself. Of course, she can evoke only "dry dreams", but at least she isn't forgotten.:uhh: Oh, crap... I hope that Pierre's hearing hasn't improved since he died...

 

[Char. Limit]

Unbiased experimentation.

 

[Proton Soup]

the most important thing is a stability of culture that allows you to pass down info from one generation to the next.

 

[Danger]

the most important thing is a stability of culture that allows you to pass down info from one generation to the next.

Very good point. In a way, it's ridiculously obvious, but it never crossed my mind as an element of the process rather than merely a circumstance of it. It needn't even be a "constant stability" (if that makes any sense), nor need every generation be involved, as long as some thread of continuity exists.

 

[Pengwuino]

Fixing your experiment to match your theory.

oops did I just say that...

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Fixing your experiment to match your theory.

oops did I just say that...

damn birds! Where is my slingshot?

As for the op: What is most important for survival; food, or water?

 

[billiards]

Asking poignant questions

 

[Evo]

Grant money.

 

[theJorge551]

I think you'd need to address which facet of science is to be analyzed.

The most important part to mankind as a whole, or the most important aspect of how science inherently "works"?

Based on how the rest of the responders have already replied, I'd have to agree. The way we humans interpret the experiments we set up is in my opinion the most fundamental part.

 

[Danger]

damn birds! Where is my slingshot?

Feel free to herd him in my direction with your slingshot. I have a 10-gauge lying in wait.

for the op: What is most important for survival; food, or water?

Although that is supposed to be a trick question, I'm going to say "water". Having water allows you more time to find food than having food provides for finding water. (I didn't quite say that properly. What I mean is that you can survive longer without food.)

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

The waste paper basket. It's the difference between science and philosophy.

 

[Astronuc]

Grant money.

or paycheck. Other than compensation - curiosity and education.

 

[Char. Limit]

A paraphrasing of a defoliation slogan:

YOU! Because only you can prevent scientists!

 

[disregardthat]

The waste paper basket. It's the difference between science and philosophy.

What?

 

[Danger]

What?

I might be misinterpreting it myself, but my take is that scientists throw out anything that proves erroneous; philosophers keep everything.

 

[disregardthat]

I might be misinterpreting it myself, but my take is that scientists throw out anything that proves erroneous; philosophers keep everything.

That's how I understood it as well. But do they?

 

[Danger]

That's how I understood it as well. But do they?

I don't know; I am neither.

 

[DanP]

damn birds! Where is my slingshot?

As for the op: What is most important for survival; food, or water?

Water :P

 

[Pythagorean]

damn birds! Where is my slingshot?

As for the op: What is most important for survival; food, or water?

Shelter is more important than either (in a survival situation, anyway).

 

[Evo]

What?

It's a joke meaning scientists only care about what is meaningful, philosophers don't care if it's meaningful. And that's the nicer interpretation.

 

[Borek]

Logical reasoning, the only way to prove she is a witch.

 

[Pythagorean]

It's a joke meaning scientists only care about what is meaningful, philosophers don't care if it's meaningful. And that's the nicer interpretation.

Yeh. I think that's hogwash though. Scientists are interested in a certain way of looking at things; it's by coincidence that most of a scientist's work is meaningful.

Scientific method is hogwash too (I'm speaking from the perspective of a single scientist, not the whole science community). We fiddle with systems and phenomena because we're interested in it. Meaningfulness and accuracy are byproducts of genuine interest, but so are misconceptions and grandiose ideology. It is at the community level that the scientific method becomes important, because in helps to wash away those misconceptions and grandiose ideology.

A single scientist has little understand of the whole reality in terms of direct personal exploration. Instead, it's the scientific community, like a partition of gases, that nudges each individual scientist's works into a uniform perspective of reality. We keep each other in check.

 

[DanP]

Shelter is more important than either (in a survival situation, anyway).

Protection - Location - Acquisition - Navigation ( PLAN ). I think those are the most important things they teach in an army of this world for outdoor survival.

 

[Pythagorean]

Protection - Location - Acquisition - Navigation ( PLAN ). I think those are the most important things they teach in an army of this world for outdoor survival.

The Coast Guard in Alaska, in conjuction with the Alaska Marine Safety Education Association teaches the "Seven Steps of Survival" in order of importance:

Recognition
Inventory
Shelter
Signals
Water
Food
Play

RISSWFP... rolls right of the tongue...

 

[diazona]

...most of a scientist's work is meaningful.

Ah, if only...

 

[DanP]

The Coast Guard in Alaska, in conjuction with the Alaska Marine Safety Education Association teaches the "Seven Steps of Survival" in order of importance:

Recognition
Inventory
Shelter
Signals
Water
Food
Play

RISSWFP... rolls right of the tongue...

What's "Play" standing for ?

 

[Pythagorean]

What's "Play" standing for ?

It doesn't. Quite literally, the seventh step is play: have fun. Do things you enjoy, reduce stress levels, get good sleep. Essential to keeping your wits about you.

 

[disregardthat]

It's a joke meaning scientists only care about what is meaningful, philosophers don't care if it's meaningful. And that's the nicer interpretation.

Can you give an example of something meaningless that philosophers care about?