Are there alternatives to the "Scientific Method"?
The "scientific method" has been established in research and development for hundreds of years. This refers to a systematic procedure consisting of a few steps that leads to reproducible results.
The Scientific Method is so simple that even children can use it. It is regularly used not only in research, but also in industrial development. We are often not even aware that we are using the Scientific Method. But what exactly is behind it? And are there alternatives?
Scientific Method
The pictures above and to the right show how simple and yet effective this method is:
- The procedure typically begins with an interesting observation that we want to understand better.
- First, we look for a suitable explanation in the literature.
- If we do not find the answer or if it is incomplete, we formulate a hypothesis for the observed behavior.
- Based on the hypothesis, we design an experiment.
- Our hypothesis predicts a result that either confirms or refutes the experiment.
- We record the result formally so that other interested parties can reproduce it.
Is it a process?
The name says it all, but still: is the "Scientific Method" a Process? In that case, we would always have to start at step 1 and go through all the steps. And of course we can design processes that are based on the scientific method.
But a method is a systematic approach on which many different processes can be based. For example, a medical student might search clinical trials to identify interesting trends. She would start by analyzing the data (step 4.) in order to formulate a hypothesis (step 2.)
Alternatives to the Scientific Method
The question of the process is important when we consider alternatives. William R. Robinson describes one alternative in The Inquiry Wheel, an Alternative to the Scientific Method. His approach has all the elements of the Scientific Method, but without a clear sequence and with additional elements. In this respect, I interpret the Inquiry Wheel as a possible implementation of the Scientific Method. Since Robinson speaks specifically of a process in his paper, this distinction is understandable.
Categories and concepts regarding the process of scientific inquiry emerged and led to the description of the inquiry wheel.
William R. Robinson in The Inquiry Wheel, an Alternative to the Scientific Method.
What role do statistics play?
In practice Statistics plays a major role in scientific work. It enables researchers to organize, describe, analyze and interpret data in order to test their hypotheses and draw conclusions. Statistics can be an important tool in all steps: In hypothesis generation, data collection and analysis. This includes the use of probability distributions, hypothesis testing, confidence intervals and regression analysis.
In practice, this means two things:
- Especially when using AI technologies (machine learning, etc.), statistics play an important role in evaluating results. The use of the scientific method is therefore particularly useful here.
- On the other hand, there are many practical situations where it is difficult to objectively reproduce the results. This is often the case when we cannot take the individual out of context. How, for example, do we want to measure "sporty driving behavior" without taking individual drivers into account?
Formal inference as an alternative in systems engineering
But in systems engineering, the systematic approach based on the scientific method is still effective and recommended. However, there is a complementary approach that can save us a lot of energy, depending on how we work. If we work mathematically and formally, we can prove things formally and correctly in many places and don't need to worry about it any further.
One example would be the Formal modeling a door control system for a subway train. For example, a requirement could be that the train must not start with open doors. We can record this with a formal specification language. The system can then check (with model checking or mathematical proof) that this state is never reached. With a certified code generator, we can create software that is guaranteed to work correctly.
What is important here, of course, is that we as humans still have to check whether our formal specification is correct. Formal methods are therefore complementary, but will not replace scientific work and established systems engineering.
Pseudo-science: "faith" and "logic"
Finally, there are other "alternatives" that do not play a role in systems engineering practice.
"Belief" is interesting insofar as it is about one's own person. And the scientific method is not applicable here, as we cannot repeat the "experiment" - after all, we only live once. But it is precisely for this reason (because it is not about our own person) that we should keep faith out of systems engineering as far as possible.
"Logic", or "gut feeling", is interesting in that the term seems to contradict formal reasoning. The problem with logic (even formal logic) is that it is always based on Axioms based. And you can prove anything with a false axiom.
This statement is (logically) true: "If the moon is made of cheese, then the earth is a disk"
The problem in practice is that many, especially more recent findings are completely counterintuitive: Newtonian behavior seems logical, while relativistic behavior seems absurd. It is even more extreme with the Quantum mechanics. Relying on "logic" here would be a big mistake.
Image source: Wikimedia, Photo by National Cancer Institute on Unsplash
