Re: Science and Progress

Dear Dr. Shapiro,

That is an interesting position on science. Doubt is the hallmark of science. Faith is the defining force behind religion. What would happen to science if we used your theory of investigation versus doubt, as you put it? We would get "investigations" in which we look only for confirming evidence while ignoring disconfirming evidence. We would fall prey to our confirmation biases. In other words, we would see what we want to see. This is not science. Never hold your scientific theories too firmly. Always look for holes in your theory and if need be, scrap it. I would have to agree with Karl Popper's and not your conception of science.

I must say that your line of reasoning has created just the aforementioned problems. You reinterpret disconfirmatory evidence against EMDR (and there is quite a bit now). If you can't disconfirm your theory, ie it lacks falsifiability, then you do not have scientific investigation. By disconfirming false theories science is able to come closer to the truth, a little at a time. That is how progress is made.

Brian G.

Replies:

There are no replies to this message.

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.