I think you may have proven my point. Merely counting umbrellas to show that there are more umbrellas around when it rains does not make sense, is not science, unless the person doing it can explain why they are doing it. In other words, part of the evaluation of whether something is science depends on the social milieu in which it is being done; but this is external to the actions of the scientist. (And by ‘explaining why’ to the 'social milieu’ I mean convincing other knowledgable scientists.) Newton spent a great amount of time doing alchemy. We do not consider alchemy science anymore but in that time and place knowledge of chemistry was very limited. He thought he was doing science and we would have too, had we been there with him. The realization that some (but not all) of the research presented in the Ig Nobel awards really is science is a social evaluation by other scientists.
Dr. Roy Jensen
(==========)-----------------------------------------?
Lecturer, Chemistry
W5-19, University of Alberta
780.248.1808
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 16:11:24 +0000, you wrote:
But is it science?
I think not. It has some of the hallmarks of science but somehow it isn?t interesting, there isn?t a point to it. This is one thing missing from most discussions of scientific method; we make decisions about content before we even start looking at methods.
That doesn't prove the hypothesis that people BUY more umbrellas when the weather is bad. It shows that people USE more umbrellas when the weather is bad. To test the original hypothesis you need to have your researchers stand around in the umbrella department of a store (Target, WalMart, etc) when he weather is good and when the weather is bad, and also when the weather is terrible (clear and sunny, cloudy but no rain, drizzly, stormy) Record sales during an hour or so (same time period for each)
You could test the other hypothesis as well by stationing people on street corners and count umbrellas for same time period, and same set of weather conditions. etc.
On Sep 18, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Forinash III, Kyle wrote:
The following is empirical, has a hypothesis, is about the physical world, involves research. Why isn?t it science?
-Hypothesis: people tend to buy more umbrellas when the weather is bad
-Method to verify hypothesis: position observers on street corners to count umbrellas and record weather conditions
kyle
-------------------------------
"It is not enough to observe, experiment, theorize, calculate and communicate; we must also argue, criticize, debate, expound, summarize, and otherwise transform the information that we have obtained individually into reliable, well established, public knowledge."
John Ziman