"Rationally Speaking", the beautiful blog of Massimo Pigliucci, a professor of philosophy at the City University of New York, last week took a post dedicated to the interesting " Problem replicability 'in science. " As often happens to me, I learned many things that I did not know from this discussion of Pigliucci and also recommend reading the article link, 'cause makes it even more' clear and interesting subject (incidentally, I also recommend the post more 'recent that Pigliucci devoted to a critical, very sensible in my view, the advertising' that the association "American Atheists" released in the U.S. and I mentioned I talking about "myths" ).
In essence, Pigliucci refers to some recent studies show that, for a growing number of scientific discoveries, problems of replicability ': that is, when you try to repeat the experiment that led to the discovery, or the results are not repeated or recur with significant discrepancies. Rightly, Pigliucci defines this amazing fact or even problematic. Potentially, it would put a whole in crisis rhetoric, widespread and highly influential, the absolute reliability 'of the results of scientific investigations. They are inexperienced and therefore I will not go into the matter and reasons Pigliucci suggests, but I was very interested in the reflection of Ioannidis which concludes the post: "If we do not talk to the public of these problems, then we are no better than those non-scientists who falsely claim the ability 'to work miracles. If the drugs do not work and we are not sure of how something should be treated, because' we should say something different? Some fear that you may receive less funding if we stop to say that we can prove that we have some miracle cure. "
analogy, and 'the same dilemma which I discussed recently with some graduate students: the first lesson of a course "Introduction to the New Testament," with the class full of students who know nothing of the discipline and will probably only follow this course on NT throughout their lives, we say that we have certainty (for example, the issue or the synoptic Jesus 'historical) or we will say that, yes', there 'majority opinion, but there are other theories and, ultimately, history and' a science very partial? Please note that the problem is not 'just do what most' good students, but must also consider the interest of the teacher (even though there are of course in dance for the funding of medical research or other such things): how many students will be class alla seconda lezione del professore socratico, che "sa di non sapere"? E quanto a lungo gli sara' rinnovato il contratto, se pochi o nessuno vanno a sentire le sue lezioni?
0 comments:
Post a Comment