3 ms·
> The author argues that science should become an anarchic enterprise, not a nomic (customary) one;[1] in the context of the work, the term "anarchy" refers to
by humanistbot 4y ago
> The author argues that science should become an anarchic enterprise, not a nomic (customary) one;[1] in the context of the work, the term "anarchy" refers to epistemological anarchy, which does not remain within one single prescriptive scientific method on the grounds that any such method would restrict scientific progress.
So sometimes we can have randomized controlled trials to really understand the effectiveness of drugs, but we can't RCT climate change or the big bang, so we have to use simulations and models. That doesn't seem like "anything goes", more like a response to that one guy in my econ class who always ranted that if it wasn't backed by a RCT, all theories are BS.
- nequo 4y ago> that one guy in my econ class who always ranted that if it wasn't backed by a RCT, all theories are BS. The converse may be true though. If it is not backed by a theory, an RCT is BS.
- eutectic 4y agoThere are many effective medicines for which the mechanism is unclear or disputed. Should we stop using them?
- operator-name 4y agoYou can use things for which there is weak or conflicting evidence for, just as you can take a sauna just becuase it makes you feel good. But take them as what they are and accept that doing so does not follow a strict interpretation of the scientific method.