Theistic Satanism: Home > Philosophy > The methods of science
The methods of science
- Some introductory articles on scientific methodology
What is "the scientific method"? And what makes scientific methodologies superior to all other means of seeking truth? Below is a collection of articles, written from several different points of view.
- What is the Scientific Method? on ScienzFair Project Ideas (Aimed at kids and a bit oversimplified, but a good basic intro.)
- Introduction to the Scientific Method by Frank Wolfs (including a brief section titled Are there circumstances in which the Scientific Method is not applicable? with mundane examples)
- Scientific Method by Michael James
- The scientific method today by Norman W. Edmund (includes a section on Everyday Problems & Decisions).
- Scientific method article on Wikipedia
- The Scientific Method (with applications to biology) by J. Stein Carter
- Socratic Method and Scientific Method by James Dye
- anecdotal evidence (and what's wrong with it) on everything2.com
- Scientific Method in Online Introduction to the Biology of Animals and Plants
- Karl Raimund Popper on Nupedia
- Popper -- Science versus non-science by Carla Fehr
- The Scientific Method by L. Mifsud on the website of the National Association of Fire Investigators
- Brief article by Michael Shermer and excerpt from The Demon-Haunted World by Carl Sagan on Thomas Jarrett's site
- The Scientific Method in the sci.skeptic FAQ, HTML version by Bill Latura
- The scientific method (Q&A, including quite a bit of overlap with the sci.skeptic FAQ, but not identical) by Jose Wudka
- The Scientific Method by Donald Simanek, whose site also includes a page of Skeptical Documents and Links. (Nevertheless, his page on the scientific method contains a statement that some of the most fundamental questions are not answerable by scientific methodology.)
- Ten Myths of Science by William McComas, in "Science Myths" in K-6 Textbooks and Popular culture on the Science Hobbyist page
- Problem-solving skills (including sections on "The Limitations of Empirical Scientific / Problem-Solving Methods," "Scientific controls contrasted with the casual observation methods we normally use," and "Psuedo-science.") by Dwayne H. Mulder.
- Some Notes on the Nature of Science by Joe Schwartz and Stephen Barrett on QuackWatch
- Goals and Characteristics of Science by G. D. Goodman, on the website of Raymond Hames
- The Process of Scientific Inquiry by Rick Hershberger on The Bioactive Site
- Scientific Method and Dialogue Among Civilizations in Modern Science and Dialogue Among Civilizations
- Methodological naturalism
Nearly all scientists accept methodological naturalism, the idea that science should look for natural explanations only and not consider supernatural explanations. Why? Because only natural explanations lend themselves to scientific methodology. A supernatural explanation, even if true, would be a scientific dead-end.
But does this, in itself, imply the actual nonexistence of any and all supernatural entities? On that question, scientists disagree, as also do philosophers. In any case, methodological naturalism (also known as epistemological naturalism) is distinct from metaphysical naturalism, the belief that the natural world is all that exists.
Below are some articles on methodological naturalism and why it is needed in science, even if metaphysical naturalism is not true:
- Methodological naturalism on Wikipedia
- Naturalism in Science on Ebon Musings
- Naturalism, Theism and the Scientific Enterprise, on a website run by Robert C. Koons, including:
- Enterprising science needs naturalism by Wesley R. Elsberry
- Another Dogma: Epistemological and Metaphysical Naturalism by Mimi Marinucci
- naturalism page in the Agnosticism/Atheism section on About.com
I do not believe that the scientific fruitfulness of methodological naturalism implies the truth of metaphysical naturalism. See The existence of the supernatural.
Back to: