No announcement yet.

Re: good science

This topic is closed.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: good science

    Thank you very much for asking such an important set of questions to "our commu
    I suppose, you mean our community of biomechanicians, but, to answer your secon
    d question first,
    I think the question "what is good science" concerns any scientist, and at leas
    t also those
    who have anything to do with science.

    I think, a lot of problems rise because of an unclear definition of the word go
    od. Obviously,
    what is good for one person, is not by definition good for another one. John Ma
    rtinson correctly
    writes that science is a part of the whole world community, and is embedded in
    economical and social structures. It is therefore hard to give a general answer
    to the question
    if the word "good" is not specified any further.

    Personally, I interpret the word "good" as "good for science itself". This is a
    much more
    defined question, which can be answered even objectively. Science is a search f
    or knowledge
    and understanding of the world around us, and any science that helps us to unde
    rstand the
    "world" better, is good science. This depends on the quality of the question to
    be researched
    as well as the effectiveness of the used methods. It is important to note, that
    a negative
    answer to a question (the hypothesis is not true) also is a positive result for
    science. I
    think, this approach may lead to the solution of a part of your question.

    If you also imply social, economical or political aspects in your question, I'm
    afraid you
    will hardly be able to find an answer in many years. Clearly, the president of
    a large
    concern that produces implants, is interested in research that increases the pr
    of his firm; an arthrosis patient will be interested in arthrosis research and
    president of a country in war will be interested in the development of weapons.
    Even in
    medical science, the results are not by definition good, also if the intention
    of the
    scientists was morally "good" (to which criteria?); the intensive care units wi
    ultramodern equipment certainly helped many people to recover from situations t
    used to be fatal in earlier years. Yet there are more and more cases in which w
    e desparately
    ask: Why are we doing this? Is the science that made these technics possible go
    od or bad? The
    answer must be: it depends...

    I hope these thoughts can help you to answer youir students.
    With best regards,

    Theo Smit