Page 26 - Becoming Metric Wise

15
Scientific Research and Communication

replicate the original experiments. Taken in its entirety, the scientific
method allows for highly creative problem solving (Gattei, 2009).
Another important aspect of Popper’s philosophy, is his theory of the
three worlds or universes:
First, the world of physical objects or of physical states, secondly, the world of
states of consciousness, or of mental states, or perhaps of behavioural disposi-
tions to act, and thirdly, the world of objective contents of thought, especially
of scientific or poetic thoughts and works of art.
Popper, 1972.
Clearly the information sciences reflect on objects belonging to World 3.
More information on the life and ideas of Popper can be found in
Stokes, 1998.
When it comes to the nature of the scientific method, we also want to
mention Thomas Kuhn’s work (Kuhn, 1962) and his use of the term para-
digm. A paradigm can be described as “a typical example or pattern of
something” (http://www.merriam-webster.com/). Yet, when scientists use
the word paradigm they mostly have in mind the set of practices that
define a scientific discipline at a particular period of time, as proposed by
Kuhn. More precisely in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Kuhn, 1962)
he defines scientific paradigms as: “universally recognized scientific achievements
that, for a time, provide model problems and solutions for a community of practi-
tioners.” Kuhn saw the sciences as going through alternating periods of
normal science, when an existing model of reality dominates, and revolu-
tion, when the model of reality itself undergoes a sudden drastic change.
Paradigms have two aspects. Firstly, within normal science, the term refers
to the set of exemplary experiments that are likely to be copied or emu-
lated. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm). The choice of exemplars
is a specific way of viewing reality: this view and the status of “exemplar”
are mutually reinforcing. Secondly, underpinning this set of exemplars are
shared preconceptions, made prior to (and conditioning) the collection of
scientific evidence. In contrast to Popper, results in conflict with the pre-
vailing paradigm (anomalies), are for Kuhn considered to be due to errors
on the part of the researcher. It is only when conflicting evidence
increases, that a crisis point is reached where a new consensus view is
arrived at, generating a paradigm shift.
Popper’s ideas can be said to be prescriptive while Kuhn’s are more
descriptive. Both originated from reflections on the natural sciences. For
this reason we mention another model, originating from the social