Looking forward to hearing what Christopher and the rest of the TIPSters have to say on the issue of "what is a scientist"?
My take on the question is "It's a misleading question". What matters, of course, is not whether or not a particular person is a scientist, but that person's use of scientific methods when claiming to demonstrate a particular claim. My completely non-scientific argument:
1) People who do legitimate science often ALSO make assertions that are not properly supported by observation.
2) People who have no scientific training can make valuable observations, and even conduct valuable research.
3) Focusing on the question "what is a scientist?" may serve to perpetuate the notion that science = expertise (that is, that what justifies a scientist's claims is that scientist's credentials).
I personally don't really care that much whether or not Freud was a scientist - I care about which of his claims are supported and which are not.
Paul Smith Alverno College Milwaukee
--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
