4 ms·
I read recently about Francis Bacon’s scientific method. It was not the modern method. It focused more on creating lists of contrasting cases, focusing on induc
by dr_dshiv 4y ago
I read recently about Francis Bacon’s scientific method. It was not the modern method. It focused more on creating lists of contrasting cases, focusing on inductive reasoning. Honestly, I didn’t entirely understand. Robert Hooke had a method, too, which he described as a philosophical “superstructure.”
Some variety in how knowledge is automatically/systematically developed seems important.
- wrp 4y ago> ...Francis Bacon’s scientific method...I didn't entirely understand. His ideas in that area were very handwavy, so nobody had a clear idea of what he meant. The classic study of his philosophy is Francis Bacon: From Magic to Science (1957).
- digikata 4y agoAs I recall, Karl Popper is generally thought to be a major contributor to the approach of modern scientific methods. Having worked in simulation and simulation validation before, simulation is a method that is powerful, but adds complexity in that you're basically running a meta verification loop on top of direct experimentation loop, and people can get lost in that complexity if you aren't careful with how you keep your simulation in touch with reality.
- rramadass 4y agoCan you point me to the sources so that i can get some more details?
- dr_dshiv 4y agoHere’s a good one: https://studenttheses.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/20.500.12932/42940/T.%20Ossenkoppele%20-%20Robert%20Hooke's%20Baconianism%20(MA%20Thesis,%20HPS,%20Jul%202022).pdf?sequence=1 https://studenttheses.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/20.500.12932/42...