You read the same book as me! “Theory And Reality—Peter Godfrey Smith”. I am surprised you say this.
What you describe is the hypothetico-deductive method (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Method pictured here is the hypothetico-deductive method, wikipedia is wrong and disagrees with it’s own sources). The hypothetico-deductive method involves guesses but the scientific method according to that book is about:
observation
measurement (and building models that can be predictive of that measurement)
standing on the shoulders of the extisting body of knowledge.
???
Profit!
Edit: that wiki page has changed a lot over the last few months and now I am less sure about what it says.
I don’t understand what reading a book has to do with it, or what you wish me to take from the wikipedia link. In my comment I stated the CR position on scientific method, which is my position. Do you have a criticism of it?
You read the same book as me! “Theory And Reality—Peter Godfrey Smith”. I am surprised you say this.
What you describe is the hypothetico-deductive method (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Method pictured here is the hypothetico-deductive method, wikipedia is wrong and disagrees with it’s own sources). The hypothetico-deductive method involves guesses but the scientific method according to that book is about:
observation
measurement (and building models that can be predictive of that measurement)
standing on the shoulders of the extisting body of knowledge.
???
Profit!
Edit: that wiki page has changed a lot over the last few months and now I am less sure about what it says.
I don’t understand what reading a book has to do with it, or what you wish me to take from the wikipedia link. In my comment I stated the CR position on scientific method, which is my position. Do you have a criticism of it?