A progressive scientific mind should have a healthy balance of skepticism and imagination. Come up with as many ideas as you can for a hypothesis, then try to prove them all wrong. If you don’t, others will. Then those hypotheses that are left standing have the strongest chance of being correct. Do you know someone who is heavy on the skepticism, and hardly no imagination? Or vice versa?
0
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
1 comment
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.that's nice, and someone may take you up on it, but you know what? being clever enough to realize there are no gods doesn't necessarily mean being willing, after (in my case) 51 years of atheism, to devote whole bunches of time and energy to rehashing it, or reinventing the wheel, or proving anything. i did this at age 15 and i've been doing it all along, and i really don't think it's a crime to take the shortcut now of giving the whole thing the once-over and saying, yep, still no gods. or were you not talking about that? then perhaps you would like to mention the subject of your proposed hypothesis? were you speaking in general? i am quite interested in science but i'm no scientist. i'm not going to figure out different ways the world could have sprung into existence; i'm listening, but i am not testing anything in a lab, on a computer or anywhere else but my mind. i'm not going to come up with those ideas, and i have plenty of imagination, thank you. but i don't even buy statement that seems to view imagination and skepticism as different ends of a scale, such as ph. one isn't acid and the other alkaline! they're not ON the same scale. they can coexist in a variety of proportions but side by side, not one sliding the other one up or down. they can both be 60 percent and the total isn't 120 percent: they're in different scales. there is something else (one something or more than one something) filling the rest of each scale.
g
genessa
Level 8
Oct 7, 2018
0
I was speaking in general, not specifically. As far as putting imagination and skepticism on the same scale, that’s how scientific process works. You might substitute the word creativity for imagination, if it suits you better.
As an example, if someone claims that you can’t go faster than the speed of light. As a scientist, you come up with ideas for experiments that may prove that claim to be true or false.
A great example from a Carl Sagan book, is the claim that, “a fire breathing dragon lives in my garage”. A little out of context, but bear with me.
You make such an imaginative claim. I’m skeptical, but I don’t outright deny your claim. I ask you to show me. I come over, you open your garage, but all I see are some empty paint cans and an old ladder. I say, “where’s the dragon?” You reply, “oh, I forgot to mention, it’s an invisible dragon.” So I come up with ways find evidence. I suggest sprinkling flour on the floor, to reveal the footprints. You say, “great idea, but this dragon floats”. Okay then, I’ll use an infrared sensor to pick up the heat from its fire. “Great idea” you say, “but it’s fire is heatless.” Very well, we’ll use spray paint to reveal its floating body. You say, “good idea, but it’s an incorporeal dragon, and the paint won’t stick.” So, what’s the difference between a floating, invisible, heatless fire breathing, incorporeal dragon, and no dragon at all?
I personally relate this example more with comparison to religious beliefs, but I’ve used it here to show the relationship between imagination and skepticism.
We use our imagination, and creativity to come up with ideas for experiments to gain insight on hypotheses. We are skeptical at first, about new ideas. As scientific thinkers, it’s important that we keep an open mind, but that we ground ourselves in solid, known facts.
@jrome043 yes, of course, i know all that. maybe i would just call it something else... and no, creativity doesn't help. i still don't see them on the same scale. i understand how you see them that way, based on the example, but i still don't. i will try to think of a different word... or something.
g
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.