Sciences - Other

Freedom in Scientific Method – Yes



Tweet
Gary C. Gibson's image for:
"Freedom in Scientific Method - Yes"
Caption: 
Location: 
Image by: 
©  

What is 'carte blanche', and should scientists have it in experiments? Carte Blanche was at one time a credit card used everywhere-should scientists have those in experiments one may wonder. This is the post Bush II era with unlimited spending for defense and national security (although not terribly well spent perhaps). Maybe scientists should have unlimited spending on defense experiments (blow up the disgraced former planet Pluto with nukular missiles programmed with artificial intelligence systems that 'hate' ice planets to pieces?


Scientists need carte blanche in order to develop the parallel system of scientific method. For far too long scientific method has put the proverbial scientific nose to the grindstone of just one truth, one cause ultimately for anything, one way to get things done in the laboratory. The parallel truths hypothesis would let scientists discover multiple truthful theories, if they exist, for the foundation of the Universe instead of just one true theory that inevitably turns out to be wrong or just partial.


What if the Universe had several origins and causes instead of just one? Parallel processing scientific method would best discover that and provide for a rating of how effective each discovery is.


Temporary scientific truths promulgated with the laws of physical investigation in which inductive reasoning has replaced deductive reasoning from primacy make scientific knowledge something like a potato chip. Just one potato chip may be satisfying for a while, yet more is always wanted,; more truth, more data, more investigation-lets move to the parallel scientific processing scientific method in order to realize the potential of in inductive reasoning.


Joseph Stalin and other Dictators new how to keep scientific method and people focused upon narrow goals. Without restricting science the V2 rocket might not have been developed. In the United States Robert Goddard wanted to develop an electro-magnetic subway from Boston to New York and was denied funding. The U.S. Government rationale might have been that they had oil enough to last a hundred years so who needs electron gizmo tubes that Rockefeller won't like? In the Deutchland of the Fuhrer the fast mass transporters would have been constructed if he'd thought about it because of the narrow range of vision of the political leader (that won't help if the leader is dumb). The lesson should be that carte blanche is better for discovery of new knowledge than it is for applying political correct technology.


Scientists should be free to pursue every legal interest as should any other citizen. Funding science by government isn't better than funding art however. It gives advantages to some and disadvantages other simultaneously. With so much wealth in the private sector the funding of science by the public might best be done when it will defend public interests rather than as a competition with the private sector.

Tweet
More about this author: Gary C. Gibson

From Around the Web




ARTICLE SOURCES AND CITATIONS