 |
| Image Source: Amazon.com, 1990 edition |
Note: Post title derived from the paper by the author as it appeared in Skeptic Magazine (link below).
Louis Liebenberg does a really good job in his work "The Art of Tracking: The Origin of Science." The book actually came out three years ago on Amazon, and apparently an earlier version with not much fanfare (and surprisingly, FREE e-book versions at Cyber Tracker, 2nd link below). His premise - and experience learning tracking skills from native foragers - that it was the habits of hunter-gatherers, then and now that caused our brains to reason and develop what we now call science and The Scientific Method. I recall reading in Carl Sagan's Cosmos a similar observation of trackers.
Liebenberg goes a bit deeper into the differentiation between inductive-deductive reasoning and hypothetical-deductive reasoning. The first has to do with direct observations and conclusions from those observations. An example given is "the sun appears to rise in the east, so it must always rise in the east." It is a bit conservative and non-questioning. The hypothetical-deductive poses: "perhaps the Earth is rotating and not the sun moving, and if I were to travel to say, the North Pole, the sun wouldn't appear to move at all." Both are paraphrased quotes from an article I read by the author that appeared on Skeptic Magazine.
It takes nothing away from Ibn al-Haytham and his mighty contribution to The Scientific Method (or Monty Python). It takes nothing from the designers of pyramids in Egypt and the Americas (they just weren't "ancient astronauts" as the fuzzy-haired guy on H2 insists). It's a little expanded from the Ionian settlement (modern day Turkey) originating philosophy that led to debate; logic and the hypothesis of the atom as the smallest division of matter. Also, the author does an excellent job of the interrelation between inductive-deductive and hypothetico-deductive reasoning: one sticks with conventional wisdom and knowledge; the other asks questions and opens itself to debate. It's probably the origins of the combative art of peer review. It may be the reason we feel impelled to explore electronics, music; atoms, quarks and quasars.
Liebenberg goes a bit deeper into the differentiation between inductive-deductive reasoning and hypothetical-deductive reasoning. The first has to do with direct observations and conclusions from those observations. An example given is "the sun appears to rise in the east, so it must always rise in the east." It is a bit conservative and non-questioning. The hypothetical-deductive poses: "perhaps the Earth is rotating and not the sun moving, and if I were to travel to say, the North Pole, the sun wouldn't appear to move at all." Both are paraphrased quotes from an article I read by the author that appeared on Skeptic Magazine.
It takes nothing away from Ibn al-Haytham and his mighty contribution to The Scientific Method (or Monty Python). It takes nothing from the designers of pyramids in Egypt and the Americas (they just weren't "ancient astronauts" as the fuzzy-haired guy on H2 insists). It's a little expanded from the Ionian settlement (modern day Turkey) originating philosophy that led to debate; logic and the hypothesis of the atom as the smallest division of matter. Also, the author does an excellent job of the interrelation between inductive-deductive and hypothetico-deductive reasoning: one sticks with conventional wisdom and knowledge; the other asks questions and opens itself to debate. It's probably the origins of the combative art of peer review. It may be the reason we feel impelled to explore electronics, music; atoms, quarks and quasars.
All links below are from or relate to the author Louis Liebenberg:
Amazon.com: The Art of Tracking - The Origin of Science
Cyber Tracker: The Origin of Science
Skeptic Magazine:
Tracking Science: The Origin of Scientific Thinking in Our Paleolithic Ancestors
No comments:
Post a Comment