Science versus Academia

[Igel]

15. That's one part of it.

It's the dominant part. Stressing it and nothing else can be misleading.

The first important part of science is usually based entirely on observation. You notice things, categorize things, and organize the data. Then you form your first hypothesis based on abductive reasoning.

I've actually seen "gee, isn't this interesting?" articles dissed as non-science. Reporting on a set of observations that establishes a fact at odds with theory is wonderful science, even if how the theory needs to be revised isn't obvious. Yet all modern science rests on hundreds, if not thousands, of such articles--pointing out facts that could be organized and "grown" into a theory.

Too many of my high school students actually believe that this kind of research doesn't count as science because it doesn't fit the straitjacket.