3 ms·

I suspect it wasn't so much accidental discovery as a trial and error refinement of their craft. Metalworking began long before they knew the science of it all.

I suspect it wasn't so much accidental discovery as a trial and error refinement of their craft. Metalworking began long before they knew the science of it all. History seems littered with these practical applications of phenomenon without full understanding. You can even say software development is done (programs are built and used) without true understand how to do it "correctly". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metalworking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metalworking http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/samurai/ http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/samurai/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy

DabAsteroid 18y ago
I suspect it wasn't so much accidental discovery as a trial and error refinement Trial-and-error = accident. We use science because it is more efficient than brute force (trial-and-error; accident).
- DaniFong 18y ago
  Not really. Trial and error implies intention: you know more or less what you want to accomplish, and you try over and over until something works, or you give up.
  - DabAsteroid 18y ago
    over and over until something works Indeed. ...Until something accidentally works. . Lower animals tend more to learn by accident. They might memorize or ritualize what works, but they do not resonate with why it works. Higher animals tend more to learn by developing mental-resonance with natural processes (i.e. they do resonate with why things work), saving the effort involved in accidental-discovery learning techniques such as trial-and-error. The main indices of intelligence in animals are the speed of learning and the complexity of what can be learned, the integration of sensory information to achieve a goal, flexibility of behavior in the face of obstacles, insightful rather than trial-and-error problem-solving behavior, transfer of learning from one problem situation to somewhat different situations, and capacity to acquire abstract or relational concepts. (Arthur Jensen. Bias in Mental Testing. http://www.amazon.com/Bias-Mental-Testing-Arthur-Jensen/dp/0029164303 http://www.amazon.com/Bias-Mental-Testing-Arthur-Jensen/dp/0... From the section "Animal Intelligence".) . Perhaps trial-and-error should be classed as a subset of accidental discovery -- e.g. there would be myriad ways of accidentally discovering, one of which would be the motivation-driven trial-and-error. Place a chicken on one side of a limited-length chain-link fence, and food on the other side, and the chicken will use the sheer force of its hunger-drive to discover how to get to the food. It has a motivation to get to the food, but it cannot mentally-resonate with the spatial processes -- the distance, the fence, gravity, etc. -- that are keeping it and the food separate. It therefore applies its motivation to accidental discovery -- sepcifically, the motive-driven accidental-discovery technique of trial-and-error. E.g., it will scramble around in a panic until it accidentally discovers one of the two routes to the food -- a few feet to either side of its original location. This process might take many minutes or hours. The chicken might even die of hunger without discovering that walking a few feet around the fence will get it to the food. In the same test, a dog will mentally-resonate with the spatial processes involved, and simply walk around the fence. The chicken applies the accidental-discovery technique of trial-and-error. The dog theorizes, i.e. mentally-resonates, i.e. applies science.

DabAsteroid 18y ago

I suspect it wasn't so much accidental discovery as a trial and error refinement Trial-and-error = accident. We use science because it is more efficient than brute force (trial-and-error; accident).

DaniFong 18y ago
Not really. Trial and error implies intention: you know more or less what you want to accomplish, and you try over and over until something works, or you give up.
- DabAsteroid 18y ago
  over and over until something works Indeed. ...Until something accidentally works. . Lower animals tend more to learn by accident. They might memorize or ritualize what works, but they do not resonate with why it works. Higher animals tend more to learn by developing mental-resonance with natural processes (i.e. they do resonate with why things work), saving the effort involved in accidental-discovery learning techniques such as trial-and-error. The main indices of intelligence in animals are the speed of learning and the complexity of what can be learned, the integration of sensory information to achieve a goal, flexibility of behavior in the face of obstacles, insightful rather than trial-and-error problem-solving behavior, transfer of learning from one problem situation to somewhat different situations, and capacity to acquire abstract or relational concepts. (Arthur Jensen. Bias in Mental Testing. http://www.amazon.com/Bias-Mental-Testing-Arthur-Jensen/dp/0029164303 http://www.amazon.com/Bias-Mental-Testing-Arthur-Jensen/dp/0... From the section "Animal Intelligence".) . Perhaps trial-and-error should be classed as a subset of accidental discovery -- e.g. there would be myriad ways of accidentally discovering, one of which would be the motivation-driven trial-and-error. Place a chicken on one side of a limited-length chain-link fence, and food on the other side, and the chicken will use the sheer force of its hunger-drive to discover how to get to the food. It has a motivation to get to the food, but it cannot mentally-resonate with the spatial processes -- the distance, the fence, gravity, etc. -- that are keeping it and the food separate. It therefore applies its motivation to accidental discovery -- sepcifically, the motive-driven accidental-discovery technique of trial-and-error. E.g., it will scramble around in a panic until it accidentally discovers one of the two routes to the food -- a few feet to either side of its original location. This process might take many minutes or hours. The chicken might even die of hunger without discovering that walking a few feet around the fence will get it to the food. In the same test, a dog will mentally-resonate with the spatial processes involved, and simply walk around the fence. The chicken applies the accidental-discovery technique of trial-and-error. The dog theorizes, i.e. mentally-resonates, i.e. applies science.