3 ms·

Its called a case study - it usually the first step to multi-person large breadth studies. Its a “we encountered X anomaly, which is very i interesting and hop

by idclip 6y ago

Its called a case study - it usually the first step to multi-person large breadth studies. Its a “we encountered X anomaly, which is very i interesting and hopeful, and we arent taking money to get lambos. Plz give funding” Just the scientific method, Case 0 (we are effed, ppl die. God will be done) Case 1 (ooooh) - case study Case E(mperical, study funding yay - larger chunk of department funding allotted) Case E+1 Peer review, fellow/sister studies adding proof. Sometimes skipped for major which bring experience or reputation, often natural sciences due the existence of logical verification methods. * For social sciences, we have tests such as ANOVA, Eta^2 and Omega^2 (McDonald’s reliability) - there is an absence of logical verifications here due to systemic constraints, ie: its impossible to do studies with (Inf) participants. Case E+1 -> N+1 (proof or generialized applicability, or enough confidence to yolo a vaccine or medicine or new tech onto the population) Edited: actually E comes before N and N+1 by expanding the case study to studies with control groups and more participants.

orzig 6y ago
Thank you for laying this out. I remember in my early years as a aspiring scientific thinker, I fell into the trap of thinking things were gold standard or BS. This is the clearest breakdown I’ve seen of how knowledge actually solidifies in the real world (with Temporel and financial constraints considered). This or a refined version of it should be shared far more broadly!
- idclip 6y ago
  Steal it please, what do you think about my modification? I have MS (brain damage, makes me forgetful and erratic/eccentric) and suck at self promotion. I wouldnt know where to start. In my editing bonanza, i cut an important step: Case N(umerical hypothesis, doctoral work and more funding for the PhD: hypothesis getting formulated in more rigorous ways, maybe finding roots and improving on older methods, comparing with older methods, or disproving older methods) I cant seem to edit the comment anymore, i will come back to it later today and see! For now, i posted it as a new submission and hope it finds audience

by idclip 6y ago

orzig 6y ago

Thank you for laying this out. I remember in my early years as a aspiring scientific thinker, I fell into the trap of thinking things were gold standard or BS. This is the clearest breakdown I’ve seen of how knowledge actually solidifies in the real world (with Temporel and financial constraints considered). This or a refined version of it should be shared far more broadly!

idclip 6y ago
Steal it please, what do you think about my modification? I have MS (brain damage, makes me forgetful and erratic/eccentric) and suck at self promotion. I wouldnt know where to start. In my editing bonanza, i cut an important step: Case N(umerical hypothesis, doctoral work and more funding for the PhD: hypothesis getting formulated in more rigorous ways, maybe finding roots and improving on older methods, comparing with older methods, or disproving older methods) I cant seem to edit the comment anymore, i will come back to it later today and see! For now, i posted it as a new submission and hope it finds audience