Ed, Are you arguing that the questions that generate an idea for a lab experiment are not based on some theory? that the theory comes out of some vacuum rather that some assumptions about human nature, etc? that the way the experiment is set up also comes out of a vacuum of some sort rather than some preconceived ideas about the nature of life?
Selma ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ed Weick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Brian McAndrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 2:21 PM Subject: Re: [Futurework] Re: Not ideological (was More crap again) > > > > At 1:17 PM -0500 12/20/02, Ed Weick wrote: > > >However, K&T were psychologists, > > >not economists, and therefore better equipped to use the laboratory. > > > > > > > > Hi Ed, > > And because they are 'better equipped to use the laboratory' is that > > suppose to mean that there is no ideology at play in the lab?! Don't > > the methods and procedures of the lab grow out of a faith in a > > particular ideology i.e. western science? > > > > Take care, > > Brian > > OK, but I think that's taking the point a little too far. I would argue > that science is science, and not ideology, though it has served ideological > purposes. One has to allow people curiosity that is not necessarily > ideologically driven. All a lab does, or is supposed to do, is to allow > that curiosity to be satisfied in as neutral a setting as possible. Of > course, labs don't always do this. > > Ed > > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
