Scientific Method - Twelve Logic Steps as a Methodology of Investigation
||| Logics Home || Logics Site Info |||
Scientific Method - Twelve Logic Steps
Through previous sensorial perceptions of an object, the mind can use the stored information to create an estimated concept (mental picture) of what another object might be sensed as. After the mind has sensorially perceived an object's height, the mind then has stored information of what "height" implies, and the mind can then relate the information to other objects, whether the objects are sensorially perceived or merely communicated by language. Without first sensorially perceiving height, width, and length, the mind cannot perform logic about height, width, and length to derive abstract concepts about shapes and sizes. Due to precious few individuals having given sensorial observation to the perception of shaped duration, it is not possible for the individuals to create four dimensional thoughts, and if words alone were sufficient enough to communicate all knowledge, then all individuals would be capable of thinking four dimensionally. The popular belief as is often promoted by western science, that a thing can be known solely through the exchange of verbal or written communication, is in error. Also, though two individuals may have sensorially perceived a singular thing, still there cannot be an accurate communication through words because both individuals' sensorial perceptions cannot be of equal quantity, equal quality, equal emotional state, equal mental stance, nor of an equal point of view. Each individual's observation is unique, and so is each individual's definition of a word unique.
Accuracy of an observation is directly proportional to the individual's own accuracy of Foundational Reference, Mental State, Mental Stance, Mental History, Emotional State, and acuity of Sensorial Perception.
(8) Analysis of Sensorial Perceptions : A healthy mind, that is in conscious awareness and curiosity of a sensorial perception, will self-initiate a series of conscious mental comparisons of the present perception to memories of previous perceptions; which is the act of logic. Without interest and curiosity, a portion of sensorial perceptions will be stored as memories, and no further conscious mental activity regarding the perceptions will occur.
Feeding back to the reason or purpose of the Mental Stance, if there is sufficient reason to pursue interest further, the mind will continue to mentally weigh and judge present perceptions to past perceptions. Without the reason or purpose to pursue the matter further, there will be no conscious analysis of the sensorial perception and neither will the mind progress through this step nor the next.
(9) Hypothesis : If the Mental Stance has reason or purpose to progress through the Analysis of Sensorial Perceptions stage, the mind can then formulate a guess or belief about what the sensorial perceptions might indicate relative to the individual's memories of past experiences. The mind will analyze the sensorial perception and judge the perception relative to the individual's Foundational Point of Reference and Mental History. If an individual's Foundational Point of Reference and Mental History are based upon the beliefs of a science/religious book, then the individual will interpret the sensorial perception relative to the science/religious beliefs, and the resulting hypothesis will be contorted to be in agreement with the science/religious beliefs. Similarly, if the Foundational Point of Reference and Mental History are based upon the belief that mathematics is a valid measure of Nature, then the hypothesis will be contorted to be in agreement with the belief in mathematics. The individual whose Foundational Point of Reference and Mental History are based on wonder, curiosity, and love of Nature will possess the Mental Stance of being capable of an unbiased perception about Nature.
The unhealthy mind stops at this stage and accepts as true any guess or belief that the mind might have imaged to be the cause or effect of a sensorial perception.
The healthy mind possesses an innate self-critical mechanism that perpetually questions itself in a repetitious stream of 'what-ifs' and comparisons of past memories and learned knowledge. After the stream of self-questioning has reached the point of having no further useful questions to ask itself, only then does the mind choose the most likely conclusion of what the present sensorial perception might imply.
(10) Validation : If a string of reasoning has the potential for being verified through the use of additional sensorial perceptions, the mind can then assemble an experiment that will provide additional sensorial input-information that can then be logically weighed relative to the hypothesis. If the experiment can be performed several times with each repetition providing a similar result as the original sensorial perception, then the mind can rationalize that, during events in life that include activities similar to the experiment, the future sensorial perceptions will likely remain similar.
An aware infant, sensorially observing variations of sunlight, warmth, tastes, sounds, and aromas can arrive at a hypothesis on the second day that the sensorial perceptions imply a cyclic nature of Nature. The third day helps to confirm the hypothesis, and by the fifth day it might appear likely that the cycles will continue occurring as before. Adding other sensorial information, the infant can recognize cycles of weeks and months, and the infant's hypothesis of cycles is further validated each following day, week, and month. The aware child can sensorially perceive the differences of seasonal change, which in the second year the child can recognize a repetition of the first cycle of seasons, and the child will wait until the completion of the third year to verify the hypothesis that seasons exist and that the seasons are repeated cyclically. By the fifth year the aware child will be of the conclusion that the seasons will likely continue cycling as before unless there is cause for the seasons to change. The aware child, however, will continue to hold the conclusion of "I don't know that the cycles will forever continue" because the child is aware that Nature has the capacity to alter some cycles, that some cycles are based on dualities, some cycles are based on triplicities, some cycles are based on the combination of triplicities and a single, that some cycles exist within a triplicity and a quad combined, and that there is no guarantee that this planet will forever exist in the same orbit as today, and because the child knows that it is necessary to observe all cycles of all time before it is possible to form an accurate conclusion of any. The aware infant, at two days old, is performing a superior form of logic sequencing than what modern science claims for its scientific method. Science did not invent the scientific method, nor can science accurately lay claim of being the sole source of 'scientific inquiry.' (See also Child Prodigy for its discussion on the popular myth that prodigious intellects cannot exist without adult education.)
The uncareful mind accepts without self-criticism that seasons will continue unaltered, but the aware mind will not accept the unsubstantiated belief that seasons will continue unaltered, and the aware mind remains in a constant analysis of comparing present observations to past observations. It is the uncareful mind that claims a cyclic event has been proven valid, while the careful mind knows that no such validation has occurred.
If an experiment proves inconclusive or if it proves a variance of results that exceed the limitations of the hypothesis, then the original hypothesis has not yet been validated as correct, and further experiments are required before an individual can acquire a sufficient quantity of examples to derive a rational trend within the results.
The healthy mind automatically progresses through all stages while the individual is within the act of a new sensorial perception. When an observation is of a complex object and activity, it might be necessary for the experimentation to include a lengthy process of observing or manipulating physical objects to determine how each object's behavior resembles the behavior of the original hypothesis.
There can be no validation of a hypothesis without there being a sufficient quantity of experiments that repeatedly show similar results.
(11) Conclusion : After having progressed through all previous stages with the highest quality of conscious attention, only then is it possible to accurately theorize about a likely conclusion. If the stages of thought and action were correct, then the final conclusion will be an honest "I don't know."
It is possible to say that all rocks will fall to earth when dropped from the height of one's head, but it is not possible to accurately claim that all rocks will fall if there occurs a disturbance in the rock's environment, that of an increase of wind or a decrease of gravity. It is possible to say that gravity is the cause of rocks falling, but if the individual himself does not know what gravity is, then the individual has based his conclusion upon the belief that an unknown thing is performing an unknown act upon a rock. While the conclusion may be correct, that some effect in Nature causes rocks to fall to earth, still it is not logical to claim how a thing works if there is no knowledge of how the thing works.
(12) Application : Once an observation has been carried through the stage of Conclusion, the new knowledge is then applied to the individual's life. If the knowledge is concluded to be beneficial to the body, then the individual will apply the knowledge by living in a manner that exhibits the person's knowledge that the conclusion was correct. If the knowledge is concluded to be beneficial to the mind, then the individual will apply the knowledge to his own thinking. If the person does not apply the knowledge to his own life, then he does not believe in his Conclusion.
The above stages are a brief outline of the sequence that a healthy mind progresses through during all sensorial perceptions of interest. Which Came First - the mind first determines the importance of the topic relative to its sequence of existence within Nature. Foundational Point of Reference for Logic - the mind logically determines the topic's relativity to what is known in Nature. Emotional Stability - the individual is in the state of caring for accuracy, of caring about the topic, of caring about Nature, of caring to achieve the best knowledge, of caring about the outcome of the observation, and of caring to think and act with the highest degree of accuracy and benefit that is only possible through selfless love. Mental State - the mind is acutely conscious of the sensorial perceptions. Mental Stance - the individual holds a natural awe, wonder, and curiosity for his reason and purpose for observation. Mental History - the individual has used a similar sequencing of stages of observation in the past which are now capable of being usefully applied to the current observation. Sensorial Observation - the individual is aware of the need to sense more than sight, and the individual acquires exponentially more information about an object through the use of all five senses. Analysis of Sensorial Perceptions - the individual's clarity of thought and memories provide for clarity of analysis. Hypothesis - theories are based upon concepts formulated from the mental comparison of the present perception to past perceptions, and the hypothesis will likely be reasonably valid due to the wealth of information used to formulate the hypothesis. Validation - with interest and a self-driven will to verify a thing right or wrong, the individual will strive to confirm or disprove the hypothesis. Conclusion - though a conclusion may be constructed from irrefutable evidence, still the healthy mind knows that it is possible that new information can invalidate a conclusion, and therefore nothing is ultimately "proven." Application - the acid-test of an individual's Conclusion.
The popular westernized "scientific method" is generally listed as observation, hypothesis, experimentation, and conclusion. The scientific method gives no importance to the need of Firsts, none to Foundational Points of Reference, none to Emotional Stability, none to Mental State, none to Mental Stance, none to Mental History, no direct importance of multi-sensorial observation, no importance of Analysis of Sensorial Perceptions, no clarification of what the hypothesis is supposed to accomplish relative to Reality, no clarification that the Conclusion must agree with Nature and all other stages, and the single most grievous omission is the lack of Application.
Western science has known since the early 1900s that emotions influence thought and memories, but the knowledge is not applied to science's own "scientific method." If science believed in itself, then science would apply its knowledge within its own behavior. Science does not make use of its own knowledge, which validates the observance that western science is a form of pseudo-intellectualism that has little or no capacity for being of benefit to man or the planet. It is the omission of principles of behavior and sequencings of logic that have resulted in science building bombs and pollutants instead of building star ships and paradise planets.
Man was performing the twelve stages of reasoning long before the first word of language was invented, before the word "science" was invented, and some men continue using the twelve stages of reasoning without regard of "scientific method." Science does not own anyone's mind, science did not invent principles of logic sequencing, and science is not the sole source of knowledge. As religion did not invent ethics and morals, so also did science not invent logics sequencing (scientific method).
Real living and breathing men and women are the ones who perform sequencings of rationalizing topics, who perform experiments, who work in labs, who study and theorize, and the real people are the only ones who deserve the credit for new useful discoveries; not an empty facade named "science."
Speaking honestly does not make a man a Christian even if Christianity teaches honesty. Declining to murder people does not make a man a Jew even if Judaism teaches against murder. Being in the 'now' with an acuity of conscious perception does not make a man a Buddhist even if Buddhism teaches being in the now, and sequencing one's logic does not make a man a scientist even if science teaches a sequencing of logic. It is necessary to stop placing labels of ideologies on people, but rather instead, to simply refer to what actions that the people do. Modern man enjoys believing that he is greatly evolved beyond his superstitious ancestors, but modern man has not evolved, and the proof is found in how man still proclaims a faith in a Conclusion, but denies the need for Application.
More articles on The Logics home page...