Visit for more information about this book to buy it on paper or download from PDF for free. 10% online members. Is it not a member of Join a free account to start and only maintain the advantages of special members with registration and receipts.
Proposal quoted: "Value in science".
Medical Institute, National Academy of Sciences and National Technical Academy. 1995. About scientists: Responsible behavior in research, second version. Washington, DC: National Academy Publishing House. Doi: 10.17226/4917.
Although Van Maanen was wrong, he was not moral. He used the methods used by the astronomy community at this time to be the best and his results were accepted by most astronomers. However, when looking back, it is based on such a sensitive technique for the effects of observers that a cautious researcher may mislead. The collapse of the method is a valuable memory of the importance of skepticism in science. Scientific knowledge and new, old or new scientific methods must be continuously checked to get possible errors. Such skepticism can conflict with other important characteristics of science, for example, creative needs and information through the use of a certain position. But organizing and seeking skepticism, as well as opening up new ideas, is essential to protect against the penetration of dogmas or collective trends in scientific results.
value in science scientists contribute more than the technology tool box for their work. The scientist must also make a complicated decision about explaining data on the issues that will continue and at the end of an experience. You must decide the best ways to work with others and exchange information. Together, these judgment issues contribute strongly to the scientific art and personality of a person's personal decisions that help determine this person's scientific style (as well as this time is the impact of the public.
this person's job). A large part of the knowledge and skills needed to make good decisions in science learned through experience and personal interaction with other scientists. However, part of this ability is difficult to teach or even describe. Many invisible influences in scientific discovery (curious, intuitive, creative) strongly opposed the reasonable analysis, but belong to the tools that make scientists for their work. If tested is recognized as a scientific tool, it will be easier to see how science can be affected by values. For example, looking at people between competitive hypotheses. In a certain scientific field, some explanations can also explain the existing events, so everyone proposed a different way for new research. How do their researchers choose? Scientists and philosophers have proposed a number of criteria under which promising scientific hypotheses can be distinguished from less fertile people. The hypotheses must be internal so that they do not reach a conflict conclusion. The ability to make accurate test predictions, sometimes in the remote areas of the sector of the hypothesis, are seen very favorable. In the disciplines in which less simple testing, such as geology, astronomy or many social sciences, good hypotheses will be able to combine different observations. Simply appreciated and its cousin, more sophisticated, elegant. Other types of values ​​also go to play in science. Historians, sociologists and other scientific students have shown that social and personal beliefs, especially