Ahoy, Bob Lee, Let us presume that we respect wisdom sufficiently to consider a fourth step in that scientific method AND of natural law that "style" when applied by whatever medium is art WHEN it is consistent with those divine precepts and bogus when not....
Hence in a land is full of cows, both sacred and profane noble quest will inevitably rise above the manured and stubbled grazing fields.... even if it takes more than a lifetime's patience. Thanks for the reminder. Looking forward to Part 2 Stephen ----- Original Message ----- From: Tai-Pan <[email protected]> To: silver-list <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 4:35 PM Subject: CS>Scientific Method, Pt 1 > Greetings admirable Crichtons of the CS art, > > Again we gather to hear pontification on something old and true. > > A man called Brian, a scientist, has lamented about what he thinks is > the Scientific Method. Anyone educated after 1945 probably thinks that > an experimental procedure is the scientific method. But its not so. > Scientist Brian gives 9kb of writings about an experimental process > (see; This is interesting--21 May). What he has written about is the old > ""make hypothesis, test hypothesis, make new hypothesis" which is only > one of many techniques used to gather and confirm data and facts. > > The scientific method has been in use since 1787 and worked perfectly > until world war two ended. At that time our Government in its big > hearted way decided that all the poor uneducated soldiers should be able > to go to college, hence the G.I.Bill, and become educated. Now we are > talking big money here, billions of dollars, that the schools of higher > learning knew they would be able to receive from the Government to > teach all these returning GI's. The schools needed books,by the tens of > thousands, and they needed courses trimmed down with out the heavy duty > meat in them, to match the intelligence level of all these new students. > No, don't say those nasty words, the facts are most of these soldiers > could never qualify for any school of higher learning at that time. In > the 40's a college degree was highly respected and only the brightest > earned one. Since the 40's a degree is almost worth nothing and lots of > degree holders can't even get a job. The courses were watered down and > the text books (back to them) were dumbed down to match the courses and > the students. I know present day degree holders who can't even read the > pre 1940 college text books and comprehend them. Anyway the teaching of > the scientific method went out the window with a lot of the other meat, > and how to make an experiment went in its place. I have copies of the > old books and can plainly see the transition take place. > > The Scientific Method really started back in 1987 with the father of > modern science. > In April of the year 1787, 113 years ago, the father of modern science > originated the concept of the Scientific Method. The only "science" at > that time was "alchemy" the medieval chemical science, and "astrology" > the medieval astronomy science. > His name was Antoine Lavoisier and he was the Director of the Academy > of Sciences for the nation of France. > Director Lavoisier wrote a book about what we now call modern chemistry > and in his book he explained what we now call the "Scientific Method". > All of our many fields of science have come from this book written by > Director Lavoisier, the Father of Modern Science. > We will read the words of Director lavoisier, taken from his book which > he wrote in the year 1787. The title of the book is "Traite Elementaire > de Chimie". In English that means Elements of Chemistry. Here are the > words he wrote. > > Every branch of science must consist of three things: > 1. The series of "facts" which are the objects of the science. > 2. The "ideas" which represent these facts. > 3. The "words" by which these ideas are expressed. > > However certain the "facts" of any science may be and however just the > "ideas" we may have formed of these facts, we can only communicate false > impressions to others while we want "words" by which these may be > properly expressed. > It is a maxim universally admitted-- in the progress of investigation, > we should proceed from known "facts" to what is unknown. > In this manner-- a successive train of "ideas" arises, so linked > together that an attentive observer may "trace" back to a certain point > the order and connection of the whole sum of human knowledge. > To a child, nature gives various means--want and pain, arising from > false judgment; gratification and pleasure---by judging right. > In the study and practice of science it is quite different; the false > judgments we form neither affect our existence nor our welfare. > Imagination--self love-- and that self confidence we are so apt to > indulge, prompts us to draw conclusions-- not derived from the facts, so > that we deceive ourselves. These suppositions--are supported, till at > last they are received, even by men of genius, as fundamental truths. > > I have imposed upon myself, as a law, never to advance but from what is > known to what is unknown; never to form any conclusion which is not an > immediate consequence-- and always to arrange the facts-- which are > drawn from them. > > (that is the scientific method) > > Lavoisier quotes from the "Abbe de Condillac". > > " Instead of applying observations to the things we wish to know, we > have chosen rather to imagine them. Advancing from one ill founded > supposition to another, we have at last bewildered ourselves amidst a > multitude of errors. These errors becoming prejudices, are of course, > adopted as principles, and we thus bewilder ourselves more and more. > ---There is but one remedy by which order can be restored--- this remedy > becomes more difficult in proportion as we think ourselves more > learned". > > --to be continued-- > > Bless you Bob Lee > > -- > oozing on the muggy shore of the gulf coast > [email protected] > > > > -- > The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. > > To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: > [email protected] -or- [email protected] > with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. > > To post, address your message to: [email protected] > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]> >
