You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: My Map of the Scientific Process - A Request For Discussion, Debate, Agreement, Disagreement and Jokes
For the most part yes I agree wholeheartedly with your model. The only caveat I'd add is (and this is depending if you want to include social science within your model) interventions and policies as an outcome of applied science. Where we have a feedback loop that cycles between qualitative and quantitative evedence, generating new hypotheses as we go. The issue we often have here is that that the notion of ‘progress’ is debatable here, it's similar instead to dominant paradigms and paradigms shits.
Yeah, I seem to have implicitly ignored the soft sciences in the above map. They tend to be messier and more intuitive than the harder sciences.
Having said that I have no idea how to graphically represent that other than turning everything into a Venn diagram circle and linking them that way.
Ha, yeah that has a tendency to happen. We have a saying in social science (that I just made up) "It's all intuitive apart from all the counter-intuitive parts, and a lot of the intuitive parts are only intuitive in hindsight, and they are likely to change in a few years anyway. So publish quickly!"
I'll give representing the process from our side a proper stab at some point in the future.