I should add that, the social climate amoung many reenactors makes a
scientific attitude almost impossible. The "possession" of knowledge
gets tied to social status. People who want to compete for status, do
it by trying to prove the other person's "knowledge" wrong. This is a
personal attack often enough that many people, not unnaturally, start to
view every disagreement with their views as a personal attack, whether
it is intended that way or not. If admitting they may be wrong, or even
that something may be looked at in different ways, makes them vulnerable
to attack, and exposure to shame and scorn from a group of others, they
don't want to examine or test their theories.
People who don't want to expose themselves to any attack, attach
themselves to someone whose social status currently proves their
theories to be "correct," rather than thinking for themselves. So it
becomes an issues of "My clique says" versus "your clique says."
This routine is totally different from real scientific discussion.
Fran
Lavolta Press
http://www.lavoltapress.com
Marc Carlson wrote:
Fran:
I don't think that discovering something is science, per se.
I think it has to do with rigor and whether you are using the
scientific method.
Examine the evidence, come up with a hypothesis and test it to
failure. Revise and repeat until it ceases to fail, at which point
you probably have a valid hypothesis.
_______________________________________________
h-costume mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
