4 ms·

I agree! I guess it's a good thing then that I did not write anywhere that we should only teach the scientific method :-) I made a statement about the argument

by ABS 5y ago

I agree! I guess it's a good thing then that I did not write anywhere that we should only teach the scientific method :-) I made a statement about the argument (and title) of the article we are commenting, it doesn't automatically assert that everything else I'm not mentioning is not important/valid or should not be done at all.

shkkmo 5y ago
The argument that article is making is a general argument about the philosophy of science and the types of demarcations between science and pseudoscience or fringe science. As such, it seems wholey reasonable to infer that you were making a general statement about how science education (particularly with the phrase: anyone's "science".) Since that was not your intent, what exactly were you trying to say? Which specific "sciences" are you advocating should not be taught and should be replaced by only teaching the scientific method?