You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
2 points

Counterpoint: the scientific method is much simpler than you described.

  1. Fuck around
  2. Find out
  3. Write it down

The rest are details of the above or elitism.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I think the sticking point is this: if people can’t reproduce it then you missed writing down an important detail and therefore didn’t finish step 3.

The elitism is thinking peer review suffices for reproducibility.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I agree with you last point, and I really, really want to with the first.

Sometimes science feels more like an art, for chemistry at least. I suppose the counter-point to this is: if you provide sufficient detail to reproduce but your results are still difficult to reproduce reliably by others, then your process wasn’t very robust and should have undergone more development before publishing. Those details may be so minor that you don’t even realize that you overlooked something.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I mean that makes sense. I guess it would be fairer to say that enough should be written down its still usable in tracking down what is missing.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Science Memes

!science_memes@mander.xyz

Create post

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don’t throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.4K

    Posts

  • 84K

    Comments