Scientific Method Evaluation Form Testing Scientific: Fill & Download for Free

Q: Since we do not know what is in outer space isn't it all just a theory?A: I swear that I will do something rash the next time I hear someone say (or see someone write) “just a theory”. Like writing angry words on a forum on the internet or something.The thing is that we have these.And these.And these.And these.And these.And these.And these.And these.And a gazillion other instruments with which we observe the universe and form, you know, scientific theories.“A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment. In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.”— Scientific theory - Wikipedia

You’ve learned the Scientific Method. Use it to determine whether marijuana impairs your mental functions. Spend a couple of weeks high, then take a test. Detox for a few weeks, then take a test. Repeat. Accumulate data. Evaluate. Form a hypothesis and test its predictions. Adjust. Repeat. Repeat.

I don’t know a better method of reasoning than the scientific method.The nice thing about the traditional scientific method is, it can incorporate all kinds of advances. The “collect data” step can use satellites, or sub-picosecond spectroscopy, or cloud chambers, or Facebook snooping. The “test hypothesis” step can include all kinds of experiments, and numerical modeling. And evaluating agreement between the data and the hypothesis can use ever-developing statistical methods.The greatest weakness of the traditional scientific method is the “develop hypothesis” step. There’s a large literature on creative thinking, but most of us spend a career and come up with only a couple of truly novel hypotheses. For me it was two, and only one of them was really valuable.There have been computer programs that generated hypotheses by testing data sets against a wide set of functional forms. Eureka is the most recent step in that direction that I’ve seen (Computer Program Self-Discovers Laws of Physics). More generally, big data analysis and neural networks and multi-cycle numerical models can “discover” hypotheses that fit the data but are not easily explained in terms humans understand. But these hypotheses can also be tested.So, if you think of the steps in the “scientific method” in the limited ways that you first learned them (for me it was in high school biology) then there are lots better methods. But, if you think more generally, the scientific method still describes our best, most successful reasoning.