Is there a scientific method?
Meeting 1 | Tuesday, September 8, 2026 | 1:00-2:00 PM Pacific
Central question
Is hypothesis-testing a universal account of inquiry, a standard for justification, or one useful mode among several?
The paper pair
Pairing type: Methodological ideal / evidential counterpoint.
Paper A: Strong Inference
- Science (1964). Paper / publisher record
Read Platt in full. Identify the role of alternative explanations and discriminating observations.
Access: Publisher/DOI page; full text may require institutional access.
Paper B: Methodological and Epistemic Differences between Historical Science and Experimental Science
- Philosophy of Science (2002). Paper / publisher record
Read Cleland’s central comparison and conclusion; the discussant reads the full argument.
Access: Publisher/DOI page; full text may require institutional access.
Why these papers belong together
Platt offers a prescriptive strategy; Cleland analyzes differences between experimental interventions and reconstructing past events. Neither paper directly records this group’s daily research. Test both against an actual project rather than declaring one a complete scientific method. (Platt 1964; Cleland 2002)
Prepare before the meeting
Bring one important paper and a short reconstruction of how the work actually proceeded. Mark which steps are documented and which are inferred.
Discussion questions
- Can an observational study discriminate hypotheses without controlling the system?
- Which research actions are not well described as a test?
- Are we describing how ideas are generated or how claims are warranted?
One-hour meeting
| Time | Activity |
|---|---|
| 0-10 min | Independent first judgments; surface disagreements. |
| 10-25 min | Compare the papers: claim, evidence, assumptions, and limits. |
| 25-45 min | Work through the case exercise below. |
| 45-55 min | Translate the discussion into agent requirements and tests. |
| 55-60 min | Record an output and one unresolved disagreement. |
Case exercise
Reconstruct a project as initial knowledge -> observation -> representation -> question -> proposed explanation -> check. Compare that trajectory with the published narrative. Do not invent a private chronology from the article structure.
Agent-design or evaluation output
Inquiry-action vocabulary v1: exploration, measurement, characterization, question formation, explanation, discrimination, synthesis, and revision. Note where an agent should abstain or seek more evidence.
Record after the meeting
Record the evidence for your main claim, what changed your mind, what remains unresolved, and one change to the agent or its evaluation. Keep confidential examples in private group notes rather than committing them to this public book.