NationStates Jolt Archive

I was just wondering if someone can help me out on this, as i am lazy and do not wish to check the internet:

What is the Aristolian (as in Aristotle) scientific method?

AND

Is it still the one used today? If not, what method is used now?

I was just wondering if someone can help me out on this, as i am lazy and do not wish to check the internet:

What is the Aristolian (as in Aristotle) scientific method?

AND

Is it still the one used today? If not, what method is used now?

not sure on aristotle - but whatever it is, its the one that lead him to believe that heavy objects fall faster than light objects. i seem to remember something about mainly being deductive instead of inductive...

the modern one, in so far as the actual enterprise of science actually follows the scientific method, is based off the ideas of francis bacon - modified to some extent by later thinkers.

thanks

not sure on aristotle - but whatever it is, its the one that lead him to believe that heavy objects fall faster than light objects. i seem to remember something about mainly being deductive instead of inductive...

the modern one, in so far as the actual enterprise of science actually follows the scientific method, is based off the ideas of francis bacon - modified to some extent by later thinkers.

Hey I remember that now!

he figured that experiments were unneccessary, because the universe is so inherently logical that you could prove anything by thought alone.

Hey I remember that now!

he figured that experiments were unneccessary, because the universe is so inherently logical that you could prove anything by thought alone.

that's the one. crazy, no? though me and my friend in high school had our own theory about aristotle. it was the 'going out to lunch' theory of aristotlean science. basically he was in the middle of writing about gravity and was just about to actually test it when he suddenly remembered it was lunch time. so he calls it quits for a bit and goes to eat. then he gets back and says, "where was i? ah yes, i remember. 'heavy objects fall faster than light ones. i know, i tested it myself just before lunch.'"

that's the one. crazy, no? though me and my friend in high school had our own theory about aristotle. it was the 'going out to lunch' theory of aristotlean science. basically he was in the middle of writing about gravity and was just about to actually test it when he suddenly remembered it was lunch time. so he calls it quits for a bit and goes to eat. then he gets back and says, "where was i? ah yes, i remember. 'heavy objects fall faster than light ones. i know, i tested it myself just before lunch.'"

From what I understand of Aristotle his whole life was one long series of lunches - he never DID anything (besides talk/think/eat), so how could he take a lunch break?

From what I understand of Aristotle his whole life was one long series of lunches - he never DID anything (besides talk/think/eat), so how could he take a lunch break?

dedication?

dedication?
:D lmao :D

Modern science really moved away from Aristotle when Robert Boyle came around. Prior to BOyle, the aristotelian, 'science through experience and logic' method was the norm. BOyle changed all that with the air pump when he successfully created a vacuum in a laboratory. This sparked the changeover to laboratory science which is most prominant today.

The artistotelian scientific method was a priori rationalism.
you sat down, and used your intelligence to work out the way things should be.

I guess in a way it's similar to cartesian rationalism and the 'clear and distinct idea'

As to what the current scientific method is, there is still a lot of debate on this issue.

The Vienna Circle believed in the verification theory of meaning. That something could only having meaning (and therefore be true) if it could be shown to be so through experimentation/observation.

Karl Popper shifted this to the theory of falsification, in that you generated a hypothesis, then attempted to disprove it (again through evidence), if you couldnt disprove it, the theory wasnt True (with a big T) but was the best theory you had as yet. It was still contingently held.

Polyani had similar ideas to Popper, and currently the most dominant version of scientific method are ideas known as 'scientific realism' deriving from the work of Roy Bhaskar and others posits that although we cannot be sure that the scientific theories we have are the Truth, but they are good approximations, and hold valid on several layers of reality below the directly observable (Positivists, such as the Vienna circle, only believed in direct observation, which would cause all manner of problems for modern physics)