Dear Jane,
That is true (and very interesting), Popper didn't believe in inductive
reasoning as part of the scientific process, however, when you apply the
H-D method you can only corroborate the hypothesis, you cannot confirm
or prove logically an hypothesis, but you can logically reject the
hypothesis. Popper proposed to work on falsification instead of
corroboration, because he recognized the asymmetry.
The following is not about a true hypothesis but help to make the case:
If you continue seeing white swan you cannot logically confirm that all
the swans in the planet are white (in fact they are not, there is a
species of black swan in Australia). You only confirm the hypothesis
until more data is collected, but you never are 100% sure that all the
swan are white. However, if you see a black swan you can logically
reject the hypothesis, and you are 100% sure that not all the swan in
the planet are white.
Many scientisits will search for more white swans, but Popper will say,
don't worry for more white swans, search for a black swan.
Hope this help,
Sorry about any grammatical error but English is not my first language.
Manuel
On 28/02/2011 04:51 p.m., Jane Shevtsov wrote:
Dear Manuel,
Thanks for your reply! I'll have to look up the books you recommended.
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Manuel Spínola<mspinol...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is necessary to distinguish between statistical and scientific hypothesis. Statistical hypotheses
is about patterns, scientific hypotheses are about process (they are based on "why" or
"how").
My experience on this topic tells me that most ecologists do not know the
difference between the 2 kind of hypothesis.
I agree. The fact that the two are conflated so often is why I decided
to ask about them together.
Falsification is the contribution of Karl Popper to the Hypothetic-Deductive
method. It has nothing to do with statistics or statistical hypothesis.
The hypothetic-deductive method has been considered as "the scientific method",
however not many people know how it works. The hypothetic-deductive method is inductive
and not deductive like the
namesuggest.
Now that's an interesting comment. Popper went out of his way to avoid
induction. In fact, he actually claimed that it doesn't exist in
science! Why do you say that the hypothetico-deductive method is
actually inductive?
Best,
Jane
On 27/02/2011 11:44 p.m., Jane Shevtsov wrote:
Fellow Ecologgers,
Lately, I've been thinking a lot about the role of hypothesis testing
(both the statistical and falsificationist varieties) in biology in
general and ecology in particular. Before saying anything, I want to
ask the forum a few questions.
1. What do you think of the current emphasis on hypothesis-driven
research? Does it help you do better science? Is it crowding out other
approaches?
2. Have you ever had a grant proposal or publication declined because
of an absent or unclear hypothesis?
3. Have you ever recommended that someone else's grant proposal or
publication be declined for that reason? Was it the main reason?
I look forward to hearing what people have to say.
Jane Shevtsov
--
Manuel Spínola, Ph.D.
Instituto Internacional en Conservación y Manejo de Vida Silvestre
Universidad Nacional
Apartado 1350-3000
Heredia
COSTA RICA
mspin...@una.ac.cr
mspinol...@gmail.com
Teléfono: (506) 2277-3598
Fax: (506) 2237-7036
Personal website: Lobito de río
Institutional website: ICOMVIS
--
*Manuel Spínola, Ph.D.*
Instituto Internacional en Conservación y Manejo de Vida Silvestre
Universidad Nacional
Apartado 1350-3000
Heredia
COSTA RICA
mspin...@una.ac.cr
mspinol...@gmail.com
Teléfono: (506) 2277-3598
Fax: (506) 2237-7036
Personal website: Lobito de río
<https://sites.google.com/site/lobitoderio/>
Institutional website: ICOMVIS <http://www.icomvis.una.ac.cr/>
