59 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
  2. Jun 2021
    1. Soderberg, C. K., Errington, T. M., Schiavone, S. R., Bottesini, J., Thorn, F. S., Vazire, S., Esterling, K. M., & Nosek, B. A. (2021). Initial evidence of research quality of registered reports compared with the standard publishing model. Nature Human Behaviour, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01142-4

    1. We just cannot know all that life will throw at us, and if we want our grading contract to be fair and equitable for everyone, we need to reexamine it, reflect on how it has been working for each of us, and perhaps adjust it. 

      This idea of re-evaluating at regular time points can be a very useful and powerful tool in more areas than just writing.

      Society as a whole needs to look carefully at where it is do do this same sort of readjustment as well.

      It's the same sort of negative feedback mechanism which is at work in the scientific method and constantly improving the state-of-the art.

    1. Lynne Kelly's observation that oral cultures revised useful knowledge into their memories appears to me to be a simple precursor to annotation and the idea of the scientific method all in one...

    2. Scholars are likely familiar with the so-called “Great Conversation,” or the idea in Western thought that we collectively participate in an iterative process of knowledge production through reference, review, and refinement. As our conversation continues over time, an ever-expanding network of annotation–through notation, citation, links, and data–traces an interconnected lineage of ideas and insight.

      Again, Dr. Lynne Kelly discusses this sort of process in non-Western and primarily oral cultures as well. Songlines has some interesting discussion of this in the Australian aboriginal cultures.

  3. May 2021
    1. Long before Vannevar Bush, Francis Bacon cited Seneca to describe a similar ambition for his scientific method, which he hoped would “abridge the infinity of individual experience ... and remedy the complaint of vita brevis, ars longa.”
    2. Blair’s previous work demonstrated that the practices of literary reading and writing were central to the rise of scientific method. Focusing on the lawyer and scientist Jean Bodin in the sixteenth century, she meticulously examined how Bodin collected commonplace reading notes and then stored and analyzed them as scientific evidence.

      I really do need to create a historical timeline for commonplace books already.

      Georg Christoph Lichtenberg also did this in the late 1700's and became famous for it after his death and the publication of his Waste Books. Worth looking into who his influences may have been?

    1. Cringing at your own memories does no one any good. On the other hand, systematically reviewing your older work to find the patterns in where you got it wrong (and right!) is hugely beneficial — it’s a useful process of introspection that makes it easier to spot and avoid your own pitfalls.

      This idea is far from new and is roughly what Georg Christoph Lichtenberg was doing with the science portions of his Waste Books in the late 1700's where he was running experiments, noting wins, losses, and making progress using the scientific method.

    1. The scrapbooks reveal a critical and analytical way of thinking and emphasis on experimental evidence in physics, through which he became one of the early founders and advocates of modern scientific methodology. The more experience and experiments are accumulated during the exploration of nature, the more faltering its theories become. It is always good though not to abandon them instantly. For every hypothesis which used to be good at least serves the purpose of duly summarizing and keeping all phenomena until its own time. One should lay down the conflicting experience separately, until it has accumulated sufficiently to justify the efforts necessary to edifice a new theory. (Lichtenberg: scrapbook JII/1602)

      Georg Christoph Lichtenberg used his notebooks as thinking tools with respect to scientific methodology.

  4. Apr 2021
  5. Mar 2021
    1. ‘bold’ means to have many observational consequences

      As I said at the wiki I saw this link from, you don't test the hypothesis directly, you test the predictions, the "observational consequences", from the hypothesis.

    1. Cailin O’Connor. (2020, November 10). New paper!!! @psmaldino look at what causes the persistence of poor methods in science, even when better methods are available. And we argue that interdisciplinary contact can lead better methods to spread. 1 https://t.co/C5beJA5gMi [Tweet]. @cailinmeister. https://twitter.com/cailinmeister/status/1326221893372833793

  6. Feb 2021
  7. Dec 2020
    1. A scientist who does not utilize the scientific method is as much use as a carpenter who cannot make chairs or a plumber who cannot fix toilets. A science that exists as a fixed absolute, whose premises are not to be questioned, whose data is not to be examined and whose conclusions are not to be debated, is a pile of wood or a leaky toilet. Not the conclusion of a process, but its absence.

      Understanding science is a process.

  8. Oct 2020
    1. Weber notes that according to any economic theory that posited man as a rational profit-maximizer, raising the piece-work rate should increase labor productivity. But in fact, in many traditional peasant communities, raising the piece-work rate actually had the opposite effect of lowering labor productivity: at the higher rate, a peasant accustomed to earning two and one-half marks per day found he could earn the same amount by working less, and did so because he valued leisure more than income. The choices of leisure over income, or of the militaristic life of the Spartan hoplite over the wealth of the Athenian trader, or even the ascetic life of the early capitalist entrepreneur over that of a traditional leisured aristocrat, cannot possibly be explained by the impersonal working of material forces,

      Science could learn something from this. Science is too far focused on the idealized positive outcomes that it isn't paying attention to the negative outcomes and using that to better define its outline or overall shape. We need to define a scientific opportunity cost and apply it to the negative side of research to better understand and define what we're searching for.

      Of course, how can we define a new scientific method (or amend/extend it) to better take into account negative results--particularly in an age when so many results aren't even reproducible?

  9. Sep 2020
  10. Aug 2020
  11. Jul 2020
  12. Jun 2020
  13. Jul 2018
    1. I buy into Newton’s philosophy that we see further by standing on the shoulders of giants.

      I take his general point here, and Newton said something along these lines, but I wouldn't call it "Newton's philosophy". If anything this philosophy is really the scientific method and Newton didn't invent it.

  14. Feb 2017
    1. mechanistic approach

      "ars est celare artem: art consists in concealing art"

      I do not dig this mechanical, technical, scientific method dissection of writing. Unfortunately, this article is filled with this pre-Freudian crap. You wouldn't tear Raphael a new one because he painted The School of Athens figures in the wrong order.

      Are these mechanics the result of the scientific method?

  15. Sep 2016
  16. Aug 2016
    1. Performance CategoryDesign Categoriesi. StructureFrame design, shape and materials –for functionii. MobilityThrusters: number, power, orientationiii. SensorsCameras, lights, sonar, touch sensors, compass, GPSiv. ToolsArms, claws, rakes, wrenches, hammersv. Ranging DistanceTether length: waterproofing required vi. Buoyancy/ BallastFixed or variable, location and materialsvii. ControlsRC via wire or signal via fibre optic cableviii. Other?Depends on the specific mission

      Are you doing science projects? Maybe you can use an old mission scope to have students ask questions about. That way some of the questions we will need to face will be answered before we actually get the mission for this year.

  17. Jan 2016
    1. Is he saying something about inductive vs deductive methods? Where typically historians have a model or a hypothesis but now they are allowing the data to tell the story?