Wednesday, October 26, 2011 9:19:52 PM
science is not perfect. someone can be in a state of mind and you will fit it in the group you think he should be. Without an honest conversation someone can be misjudged.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 2:02:33 AM
WAIT A MINUTE! Did I just get trolled by patchgrabber's ignorance? or was that ignorace genuine...hmmm...oh well. The next best thing to being right is successful argumentation; can`t argue with that...to each his own reality...science`s main goal is to alleviate ignorance, so whatever really is most true always shines through (<-- See what I did there? ;) ) and maybe ol` patch is right after all...the truth is not always comfortable or pleasant to its discoverers...
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 1:48:31 AM
Here's my two cents (free, don`t worry, I don`t mind): The scientific method is observation, theory regarding observation, test of the theory, revision/abandonment/confirmation of the theory, and back to step 1. So long as there is structured observation, theories about the observation that can be tested and good interpretation of the data (i.e. not biased) it`s science. While many aspescts of the brain and thought are subjective, there are objective ways of at least determining the practical implications and observable signs to measure. The trick is finding the right ones, ones that can be measured, like the pain scale. We can`t measure pain, but we can keep track of its effects on significantly large experimental groups. While one person may fudge the test, most will be honest that will show in the data. Not every experiment or scientist gets this right, but to disparage a peer reviwed theory/experiment simply because of its area of study seems rash. That`s more than 2cents. ;)