Why is Speculation Limited in Science?

  • Thread starter wittgenstein
  • Start date
In summary, the great minds in history have outrageously speculated and then found their great idea among the mass that they rejected. However, allowing speculations in class often facilitates learning because it allows students to use their imagination.
  • #1
wittgenstein
216
7
Most of the great minds in history have outrageously speculated and then found their great idea among the mass that they rejected.Why cannot what works for them work on a lesser scale work for us? I'm sure that some layman before Wegener noticed that the continents can fit together . If a great mind had listened and applied his greater knowledge to that information, perhaps continental drift could have been discovered years before it became a legitimate theory. Perhaps the ban on speculation is because of the fear that too much space will be devoted to speculations. But how much time does it take to scroll down to the next thread and ignore what may be a silly speculation? Also, I have found that allowing speculations in class actually facilitates learning.* Those classes that foster a belief that a student should only accept knowledge given by the instructor usually end up with students believing that science is boring. How can sitting at a desk writing down notes from a lecture facilitate real involvement with the learning process?
* I am thrilled when a student 'contradicts" me and politely asks," but if that is so, then why this data?" or even," perhaps this is an alternative explanation." I do not take his/her comments as saying that I do not have a grasp of my subject.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The key to this, I think, is whether the speculator has any credibility. When Wheeler speculated on relativity, folks knew he was worth listening to, even if he was off-track. If Harry J. Dingledorf, plumbing contractor from Des Moines, speculates on relativity, the odds are about a billion-to-one that he has no clue. I personally don't have the time or energy to suffer such folks.

You're correct that authoritative teaching is often boring. I believe it was Faraday who said something to the effect that worthwhile learning is not fun; fun learning is not worthwhile. Planck's lectures are incredibly dry in print; I suspect they must have been sleep-inducing in person. Yet, I would attend one in a New York minute. We just have to decide whether we want to learn or be entertained.
 
  • #3
It has nothing to do with learning and all to do with adequate policing. PF has been around 8 years and just about half of those years we had an active forum for speculation. In the end we found we were overrun by crackpots (not simply curious people). To the point where it became a detriment to the forum due to misinformation. Trust us, we've been here awhile and we know what works. Unfortunately the kind of honest speculation you speak of is very rare on the internet. Thus we formed the policy. Simple as that.
 
Last edited:

1. Why are speculations not allowed in scientific research?

The goal of scientific research is to gather evidence and draw conclusions based on empirical data. Speculations, or hypotheses that are not supported by evidence, can mislead the research and hinder the progress of scientific understanding. Therefore, it is important for scientists to base their work on factual evidence rather than speculations.

2. How do speculations differ from scientific theories?

Speculations are ideas or hypotheses that have not been tested or supported by evidence. They are often based on personal opinions or beliefs. On the other hand, scientific theories are well-supported explanations for a wide range of phenomena, and are based on extensive research and evidence. They are constantly tested and refined through experimentation and observation.

3. Can speculations ever be used in scientific research?

While speculations are not typically allowed in scientific research, they can sometimes serve as a starting point for further investigation. However, before being considered a valid scientific hypothesis, a speculation must be tested and supported by evidence. It is important for scientists to clearly differentiate between speculations and evidence-based theories in their research.

4. Why do scientists rely on evidence rather than speculations?

Evidence-based research is the foundation of the scientific method. It allows scientists to make objective and reliable conclusions about the natural world. Speculations, on the other hand, are often influenced by personal biases and can lead to inaccurate or unfounded claims. Therefore, relying on evidence is crucial for the validity and credibility of scientific research.

5. How can we distinguish between speculations and evidence-based claims?

The main difference between speculations and evidence-based claims is the presence of supporting evidence. Speculations are often based on opinions or beliefs, while evidence-based claims are supported by observable data and rigorous testing. Additionally, evidence-based claims are constantly open to scrutiny and revision, while speculations are not always falsifiable or subject to testing.

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
916
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
596
Replies
1
Views
813
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
6
Views
851
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
8
Views
784
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
100
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
22
Views
2K
Back
Top