The Scientific Method
email
skeptika When the glass moved
The scientific method is what most scientists refer to when they talk of science. It is a method of logically developing and testing hypotheses and models in order to establish theories.
What is a hypothesis? A hypothesis is an explanation about a some phenomenon or a speculation of what might happen under certain circumstances.
What is a model? A model is a construct that allows us to visualise the way of things. Basically it is a set of rules, if this happens then that happens as a result.
Why do hypotheses and models need to be tested? Not all explanations are correct and speculation is just speculation without some proof.
Unfortunately you cannot just come up with any speculation or model and some weak one-off test. A hypothesis must be logical and specific, it is preferable (but not mandatory) that the hypothesis be absolute. The rules in a model must be understood and logically stated. The test must be rigorous and reproducible.
Rigorous? Scientific testing aims to eliminate all errors from the test. It is essential to eliminate all potential causes for a phenomenon other than the one you hypothesise as the cause.
Reproducible? Your test (or experiment) must be able to be performed by anyone with the correct equipment. You should repeat your experiment yourself many times to ensure the validity of your own testing. When telling the world, it is not valid to say "Oh, the experiment only works for me!" Any scientist must be able to repeat a scientific experiment, with results that support your hypothesis before it can be advanced as a theory.
What then is a theory? A theory is the accepted (or widely accepted) hypothesis which explains a phenomenon and fits all the facts that are known at the time. It has undergone experimental testing or mathematical proof (as has the Theory of Relativity) by the peers of the scientist who forwards the hypothesis. I don't really have theories, all I can have is hypotheses. Only a scientific society can have theories.
Note the caveat "at the time" above. If new knowledge comes to hand that disproves a theory then the sciencific community should be robust enough to either throw out the old theory and develop a new one which incorporates the new information or the old theory is modified. This is how we used to "know" that the world was flat and now we know that it is but a small ball in a huge universe which may or may not be expanding indefinitely.
This is all fine and dandy but how does it relate to our problem?
It comes down to what we want to test. Scientific testing of séances should centre on testing of a logically stated hypothesis. The testing should be rigorous and reproducible.
Nothing more complex than that.