The AskPhilosophers logo.

Science

Is the scientific method anything more than a good algorithm?
Accepted:
November 13, 2005

Comments

Peter Lipton
November 13, 2005 (changed November 13, 2005) Permalink

I don't think scientific research is algorithmic, unless you use the term so broadly so that any non-random behavior counts. Research certainly doesn't follow rules that the scientists can articulate, and I think there are reasons to believe that they aren't following anything like a full set of tacit rules either. Thomas Kuhn mounts an extended case for an alternative to a rule-based account of research in his classic The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

  • Log in to post comments

Alexander George
November 13, 2005 (changed November 13, 2005) Permalink

People often speak of "the scientific method", but it means nothing.There is no such method -- and one proof of that is the greatfascination and challenge scientific inquiry holds for so many people,something it would not have if its practice merely consisted in turningthe crank of The Method. However, the myth persists and it not onlygives a false picture of science, but also encourages the thoughtthat science and philosophy are very different kinds of enterprises.There are differences, to be sure, but they don't consist inphilosophy's not yet having found its method.

  • Log in to post comments
Source URL: https://askphilosophers.org/question/530
© 2005-2025 AskPhilosophers.org