Thoughts on the “scientific method”: part 1 – ignorance through inconsistency

Michael R. Powers

Journal of Risk Finance, 2007, vol. 8, issue 3, 209-213

Abstract: Purpose - In this two‐part series, the editorial aims to consider the role of the “scientific method” in human understanding, questioning both its consistency in actual practice and its reasonableness as a philosophy of action. Design/methodology/approach - In Part 1, the editorial provides a generic description of the “scientific method” and identifies a number of inconsistencies in the way it is applied. Findings - In Part 1, it is argued that inconsistencies in applying the “scientific method” may lead researchers to ignore important phenomena. Originality/value - The two‐part series challenges certain aspects of the “scientific method” as employed in the practice of modern science.

Keywords: Thinking styles; Reasoning; Cognition; Statistical analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2007
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:jrfpps:15265940710750468

DOI: 10.1108/15265940710750468

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Risk Finance is currently edited by Nawazish Mirza

More articles in Journal of Risk Finance from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().