The more I think about the RSM, the more irrational it seems. So, I've created this blog page to see if any RSM advocate can answer questions about their "method." From recent experiences, it appears that they would rather pull out their fingernails than to explain anything. They feel it is all explained at the above link. I attempted to ask some questions on their Facebook page HERE, but they just started attacking me personally, and then they deleted the entire discussion (claiming I had somehow deleted it). That left me with lots of questions but no way to ask them. So, I'll ask them here, with the hope that some RSM advocate will respond. If not, maybe someone else can figure it out.
What is the RSM supposed to accomplish?
The "mainstream" scientific method is for finding answers to questions. You BEGIN with a question. That is Step #1.
It appears that the RSM "hypothesis" is the first step in coming up with a BELIEF. But, from what I see from RSM advocates, it could also simply be a way of coming up with an alternative argument to a scientific finding by "the establishment." If so, Step #1 should be "Find an establishment theory to dispute."
Obviously, the objective is NOT to find a BETTER theory. No attempt is made to explain how or why the RSM theory is better. It is only to find a theory that the theorist can VISUALIZE, believe in, and use to ARGUE against "the establishment."
The value of such a "method" appears to be ZERO. It accomplishes NOTHING except to create a basis for endless arguing against "the establishment."
The Rational Scientific Method" seems neither rational, nor scientific, nor a method.
To be a method, the STEPS should be described. What is "Step 1"? The word "step" isn't even used in "The Rational Scientific Method." It first appears in the introduction to "The Gaedean Scientific Method" where it seems to say that the "GAEDEAN method" "consists of three steps: 1) hypothesis, 2) theory, 3) conclusions." It's anyone's guess what the steps are in the "Rational Scientific Method."
In the "mainstream" scientific method, Step #1 is to "Ask a question." Step #2 is to do research into possible answers to the question. Step #3 is to construct an hypothesis answer to the question based upon the research. Step #4 is to TEST the hypothesis with experiments. If it fails the experiments, you go back to Step #3 and revise the hypothesis. Only when you pass all experiments do you go to Step #5 which is to publish the "theory" that answers the original question.
It appears the both the "Rational Scientific Method" AND " The Gaedean Scientific Method" skip those first two steps and go straight to creating an hypothesis.
It appears that the hypothesis is really a BELIEF, which is then justified with exhibits, definitions of terms used, and a statement of facts and/or assumptions.
Somehow, the hypothesis is then turned into a "theory" Step #2 is to create a theory based upon the exhibits, the definitions and the assumptions. How the "hypothesis" differs from the "theory" is not clear. There's a diagram missing, but it seems that SPECULATION is added to the "hypothesis" to turn it into a "theory."
The key point in creating a "theory" using the "Gaedean method" seems to be to create something that is "VISUALISABLE." It appears that that means it CANNOT be a mathematical equation, it MUST be an illustration or a series of illustrations, i.e., "the Universal Movie inferred from assumptions and reasoning." My attempt to decipher "The Rational Scientific Method" results in the same thing: The result MUST be "visualisable."
The final "step" is not called a "step," for some reason it's called "Stage 3" in the Gaedean method. Stage #3 is "CONCLUSIONS." And it says reaching this point "Tells us what experimentation or data we may need to verify the theory."
So, evidently tests and experiments are done AFTER you have come up with a theory. That seems to confirm that all you have is a BELIEF that your personal logic accepts as valid.
"Stage 3: Conclusions" also contains this point: "Multiple opinions may be formed and debated over, given that both parties forming these opinions accept the theory."
There's no explanation for what that means. But, "The Rational Scientific Method" ends with this: "Once the theory is presented, science is done! The conclusion is left up to each individual." And this is stated earlier, "Conclusion: possible or not possible? Everyone decides for themselves."
That would appear to an outsider to be neither scientific, nor rational. Scientists do not decide for themselves if something is possible or not possible. They produce EVIDENCE to show whether something is possible or not possible.
The Rational Scientific Method says, "Belief, truth, evidence, and proof are not part of the [rational] scientific method."
If there is no need for evidence, the Rational Scientific Method is NOT rational nor scientific.
Ed
Where's my post, Ed?
ReplyDeleteWhich post are you talking about? And why did you delete the group thread on your Facebook page and blame it on me? As far as I can tell, it is not possible for a member to delete a post on your page. I certainly didn't delete it.
DeleteI posted a comment and when I published, it said this:
ReplyDelete"Your comment will be visible after approval."
An admin can not delete a welcome thread on Facebook. There are only two ways to delete a welcome thread, the individual being welcomed can delete it, and it can be deleted when an Admin permanently blocks a member while removing his membership.
You are not perma-blocked, we rarely do this. When someone leaves, as you did, we want you to see what we say about you. Can't do that if you're perma-blocked.
I responded to your comments over at Rational Science Blog, and I see so did Bill Gaede.
You are welcome to return to RSM, if you are being honest about it. Although I trust my admins, and so I still think you deleted your comments, I hold the possibility someone else is sabotaging us again. Therefore, I will let you back in to make your case against RSM, or to ask questions. Rest assured, you do not understand the method, and you've said repeatedly it doesn't make sense to you.
Your comments reveal this lack of understanding. In fact, you don't even understand it is YOU who is the Truther.
I linked to this and to your other blog. Others may or may not respond to you, but I won't post HERE again because I don't like "Your comment will be visible after approval" and I have my own website, HubPages, and Groups to administer.
I posted a comment and when I published, it said this:
ReplyDelete"Your comment will be visible after approval."
The only comment I saw was the one where you asked "Where's my post?" I just checked to see if Google may have viewed your previous as SPAM and put it in a separate file to await moderation, but there was nothing there. So, maybe you ACCIDENTALLY deleted it the way you evidently deleted my thread on your Facebook page. Or maybe it was filled with so many vile insults that Google automatically deleted it.
I'll rejoin your group to check the options. It makes no sense to me that I should have the ability to delete a thread where many people wrote comments. But, I've only been on Facebook for a few days, so there could be a lot of things I do not know.
I replied to the comments on the Rational Science Blog. And I SAVED a copy, since it is a good example of how RSM advocates cannot argue intelligently and need to include personal insults in every comment.
I tried re-joining the Rational Scientific Method group about an hour ago, and it still says my admission is "pending." Will they actually allow me to re-join, or will they claim I was afraid of re-joining and never made the attempt?
ReplyDeleteThe reason this blog is "moderated" is because if I allowed anyone to post anything they want, a fellow who calls himself "DXer" will post THOUSANDS of irrelevant messages here about his personal beliefs. He would post to this blog everything he now posts only to the blog at this link: https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/
ReplyDeleteWhat "moderated" means is that when someone tries to post a message, it goes into one of two holding folders: a PENDING folder or a SPAM folder. Google decides where it will go.
If the message goes into the PENDING folder, I'm sent an email telling me that a message is awaiting my approval. As I recall, they do not send me emails about posts they consider to be SPAM.
Either way, I go to the folder, read the message and decide to either POST or DELETE.
DXer sometimes sends emails filled with vile insults. When that happens, I may post an edited version of his message with the insults removed. It all depends on the message.
It's now been two hours since I tried to re-join the Rational Scientific Method group. My acceptance is STILL pending. Very soon I will shut down my computer, break for lunch and then head to the gym for my regular workout. So, will be at least two hours before I check on my admission again.
ReplyDeleteI also feel that it is now too close to lunch time to do anything on the RSM page this morning other than to acknowledge acceptance -- IF they decide to accept me.
They "accepted" me back into the Rational Scientific Method group while I was at the gym. Evidently, they created a "Welcome page" and then immediately deleted it, so they could claim that I had deleted I just the way I deleted the first Welcome page they created -- the one with the 119 messages.
DeleteBecause they deleted the Welcome Page, I had no way to check the OPTIONS available to me to see if the options included an option to delete the entire thread. Presumably, there was no such option. By deleting the page they could still claim that I was doing the deleting, and I would have no way to prove it was impossible.
They allowed me to post into another thread in the group, but they soon got tired of that and told me to leave. And they then set some switch that not only removed me from their membership, but prevents me from even seeing what they are posting about me.
They were all incredibly childish. But, I should have expected it. They were very much like "Anthrax Truthers," only worse.
Ed