This means that, insofar as is humanly possible, observation is unaffected by the observer's own belief, preferences, wishes, or values. Suppose a professor says, "Women usually don't do as well in this course as men." Unless this professor has computed average scores for men and women students, he is saying, "I have recalled the grades of hundreds of students, mentally computed averages, and found the male average score be higher The utter absurdity of such a statement shows how untrustworthy are all conclusions based upon recalling unrecorded data. Scientific observation is objective. Objectivity's the ability to see and accept acts as they are, not as one might wish them to be. Unless observations have been collected in an organized, systematic program they are likely to-be spotty and incomplete. Conclusions based on casual recollections are unreliable. Judgments which begin with, "I've talked to a lot of people and should be classed as conversation not as research. If conditions of observation do not permit such precision, the scientist must qualify judgment until more precise observations can be collected, Scientific observational is systematic. Scientists seek as much precision as the situation requires. Tennyson's lines, "Every moment dies a man every moment one is born," is literature not science. If written with scientific precision it might read, "Every 0.5% seconds, on the average in 1980, died a persevere 0.2448 seconds an infant was born." Literary writing may be intentionally vague, stimulating the reader to wonder what is meant (e.g., was Hamlet insane?), but the dramatic sweep of the novelist and the provocative imagery of the poet have no place in scientific writing. How much precision is needed? A billionth of an inch is too large an error for a nuclear physicist for a social scientist studying crowded housing, a measure to the nearest square foot is satisfactory.
'(How many people? What measuring instruments? How "terrible"?) Since scientific writing is precise, scientists avoid colorful literary extravagances. No respectable social scientist would say "I interviewed a lot of people, and most of them feel that things are terrible," and claim this was a scientific investigation. While accuracy refers to the truth or correctness 0"a statement, precision refers to degree or measurement. as described and avoids jumping to conclusions. Novelists may fantasize and politicians may exaggerate, but the scientist must try to be accurate. Scientific observation is precise. The scientific observer tries to make sure things are exactly . How does scientific observation. differ from just looking at things? does not make us scientific observers, any more than a lifetime of swatting flies makes us entomologists. Scientific observation is not the same as just "looking at things." We have all been looking at things all our lives, but this. By evidence" we mean factual observations other observers can see, weigh, count, and check for accuracy. Science is based upon verifiable evidence. SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATION THE BASIC TECHNIQUE OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD
0 kommentar(er)
