2.1. Scientific research

Scientific research is a systematized form of knowledge acquisition. Science (and technology) are called “systematic” (or “methodological”), because these activities are not haphazard. Scientific research starts with a problem. This problem points to an unsatisfactory situation which one wants to change into a more satisfactory one. In the research cycle the problem is that the available knowledge (a collection of factual statements about the world) is not aligned, or is insufficiently aligned, to the empirical facts. The facts are unassailable 1; hence the aim of scientific research is to change, respectively expand, the collection of factual statements (which appeared to be insufficiently “true”), in such a manner that they align better with the facts.

The model of the basic research cycle is shown on the left of the next figure.

The research and design cycles

Problem

The problem at the onset of the research cycle is a discrepancy between the facts and our knowledge – a package of truth statements concerning these facts. The aim of the process is adjustment of our knowledge to the facts.

Observation

One might think that the elements “problem” and “observation” are in the wrong order. For, did the problem not originate from the observation of facts which did not agree with theory? Indeed, but in order to improve the theory, we usually need more than the establishment of one or a few “anomalous” 2 instances. From the moment the problem has been recognized and we have decided to resolve it by means of research, we want to map out the deviations in as large an area as possible. This requires purposeful observation, in many cases supported by experiments.

Note that the observation is directed towards gathering factual statements and should be carried out as objectively as possible: unwelcome observations should not be concealed, dishonest samples are not allowed, etc. Values and interests should be kept out as much as possible.

Induction

Induction is the process by which a number of individual observations of facts are “summarized” in a general law. Induction always concerns a certain aspect of the reality concerned, for example the color, the temperature, the pressure or the chemical behavior, but never the reality in its totality. It gives us, so to speak, a generally valid photograph of that certain aspect of that certain reality. It images that aspect of that reality. But first there was the reality, and then came the photograph.

Induction in the research cycle is “a posteriori” (found afterwards) the material which was studied.

Deduction

Scientific research aims at explaining present and past phenomena and predicting future ones. Explaining is indicating the general grounds or causes from which the observed phenomena can be deduced. Predicting is to deduce future phenomena from the present ones. Empirical generalizations and laws and theories, gained from induction, provide for these “general grounds”. If they have explanatory power, generally they also have predictive power, but the reverse is not true.

It should be possible to derive the phenomena to be explained or predicted by means of deduction, from the theoretical relationships acquired from induction. This is what one tries to do in the “deduction phase”. In doing so, does one try in the research cycle to include the totality of phenomena in all their aspects? No, for as we already noted: sciences are essentially “aspect sciences”. Deduction thus aims at only one or a few aspects(s) of the phenomena, and leaves out all the other aspects.

Although scientific laws are often formulated in the form of hypothetical propositions (material implication), deduction takes place via a proposition syllogism 3, often according to the modus ponendo ponens 4. The following reasoning is an example: if Venus is a planet, then Venus rotates around the sun (p → q is true); Venus is a planet (p is true); therefore Venus rotates around the sun (q is true). The material implication is the major in the syllogism, the minor categorically confirms the antecedent, and the conclusion categorically confirms the consequence.

Recapitulating, we can state that deduction in the research cycle leads to a categorical explanation and/or prediction of one or more aspects of reality.

Deduction in the research cycle takes place entirely in the domain of the mind.

Testing

Testing can direct itself to the explanatory power or to the predictive power of the postulated laws or theories. For simplicity’s sake, we shall restrict ourselves here to the testing of predictive power. In view of the inductively acquired insight, deductively a prediction has been made (with or without the help of an experiment) on facts to be observed in the future. In the testing procedure these facts are observed and compared with the prediction. Does it fit the facts? If not, to what extent do the facts “support” the hypothesis, that is how “true” is the hypothesis? (In the figure above we used the qualitative notion of “degree of truth” of the hypothesis for this). In testing, the research cycle again enters the domain of the material reality. The conclusions are factual statements in the domain of the mind.

Evaluation

“Evaluation” in the research cycle does not judge only on the findings of the entire process. A decision is also taken of whether the goal laid down (more, better knowledge) has been sufficiently attained, or whether the results should be sharpened up in none or more iterations. (Also in science, such a decision implies a value judgment.) Hence, the feedback arrows which run in the previous figure from the element of “evaluation” back upwards. But if the evaluation has been satisfactory, it is decided to add the knowledge which the process has yielded to the acreage 5 of knowledge in the domain of the mind. Usually this takes place more explicitly in the form of a scientific publication.

---

1

Unassailable refers to something that is so well-founded or robust that it cannot be challenged or disproved.

2

Anomalous refers to instances or observations that deviate from the established or expected pattern.

3

A syllogism is a form of logical reasoning where a conclusion is drawn from two premises that are assumed to be true.

4

Modus ponendo ponens, often simply called “modus ponens,” is a valid form of deductive reasoning in logic. It is a rule of inference that allows one to infer the consequent of a conditional statement if the antecedent is affirmed. The structure is: If P implies Q (P → Q) and P is true, then Q must also be true.

5

In this context, “acreage” refers to the extent or range of knowledge within a particular field or domain.