Scientific Method - Science and the Scientific Method [sciencetechnology-center.blogspot.com]
See below for video links referenced in this video One of the greatest disservices that the current trend of sensationalist, opinion-based media "reporting" does is to misinform the public about medical matters. It's one thing to distinguish evidence-based medicine from science-based medicine, and another that the news media often doesn't seem to care about either. We'll discuss specific examples of how news reporting on medical science can get things both right and wrong, and possible ways the non-medically trained public can skeptically approach medical news stories to tease out the truth. Bio: John Cmar, MD, has been long enthralled with horrible infections that could spell doom for humankind, as well as sanity and skepticism in the practice of medicine. He is currently involved in resident and medical school education in internal medicine at two institutions in Baltimore, and his clinical work involves caring for patients in his specialty of Infectious Di seases. He also does Infectious Diseases outreach in Baltimore television and print media. John is a science fiction and fantasy fan, avid gamer, and podcast enthusiast. He currently blogs and podcasts on skeptical, medical, and geeky topics on The Secret Lair. Video Link #1: cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com Video Link #2: www.thedailyshow.com Video Link #3: www.youtube.com
Why You Should Be Skeptical of the Media's Medical Reporting (Dr. John Cmar)
The scientific method is the greatest modern scientific discovery. It is the process of science.
In order to study science you must first understand what science is and is not. Science is unlike any other subject. It not only requires you to think but you must also prove your ideas. So, you must not only know the definition of science, you must take the time to learn the process of science.
The scientific method was created by early philosophers to help separate the serious natural philosophers from the magicians (con artists) and philosophers. By introducing a process early scientists were held accountable by their peers and forced to prove their ideas. It would no longer to be acceptable to just state conclusions without the evidence to support it. So, it is important that you understand the scientific method and know how to use it.
The scientific method will differ slightly between disciplines but the basic structure is still the s ame. A good scientific method must contain these 5 basic steps.
1. Observation
The process of science starts with observations and curiosity.
2. Hypothesis
This step is where you ask questions about your observations and curiosity. The hypothesis comes from asking yourself and others "what if...".
3. The Test
Testing is what makes the science different from all other disciplines. Scientists cannot just state their ideas, they must prove their ideas. So, the scientist designs an experiment to provide the data needed to prove or disprove the hypothesis.
4. Analyze
After the data is collected it is time to organize and analyze all the information. Scientists use tables, graphs and equations to bring all the information together and make possible for others to understand and repeat the results.
5. Conclude
Once the information has been analyzed the results need to be interpreted and put into writing. Scientists communicate the interpretation of their data by writing and submitting articles to their peers and a variety of journals. It is in this step that the scientist's work will be checked, scrutinized and retested to determine if their work is acceptable.
The so called science of today's media is not science; it is nothing more than junk science. Junk science is any information or data that has been obtained from opinions or observations without actually being tested by experimentation. This is a step backwards into the dark ages before natural philosophers were required to prove their ideas.
More Scientific Method - Science and the Scientific Method TopicsQuestion by Luke: What type of science is basically defined as learning for the sack of learning? My physical anthropology professor used a term "true science" to define how anthropology is a study that is basically defined as learning for the sack of learning. Such as the entire human phenomenon. But the term is not "true science", it's something else... Best answer for What type of science is basically defined as learning for the sack of learning?:
Answer by Philip
Your professor mention that the study of anthropology is for the sake of learning? I don't know about it, but what I do know if you are enthusiastic about it and think it's fun to learn, it would be as good as any other subject that you take pleasure in. If you think dealing with the origins, physical and cultural development, biological characteristics, and social customs and beliefs of humankind is required or fun; then anthropology is a major subject of study. Then through continuing your education you would also be learning for the sake of learning, among other benefits. You may also conclude that you may have to go through an hour of info to get that 5 minutes of benefit knowledge that makes it worthwhile.
0 comments:
Post a Comment