Are you a Scientist?

[Kayra]

No scientist here, and I have the posts to prove it :)

[hallenrm]

I am not employed by any scientific organization, in fact have never been. Even though I hold university degrees upto the doctorate level from one of the very prestigeous institutions in science and technolology.

 

But, I consider myself to be the ultimate scientist:) In this respect I forgo all my humility.:)

[Jay-qu]

Not yet.. but ask me again in a year and a half :)

[InfiniteNow]

I chose "In training" because I'm always hoping to learn new things.

[Saitia]

I respect your opinion and didn't mean to imply it is not worthy of discussion.

I thought we went over this on another thread,perhaps I'm wrong.

My apologies if my tone was insulting.

Ed,

 

Thank you for your kind response; I do appreciate it.

 

 

 

Saitia ,I guess I just resent the "they just don't know it."part.

I don't consider myself a religious person,yet I would never tell one who is that they are something different and"just don't know it,"even if I thought that were the case.

I appreciate your candor as well; I hope I might address what you

said a little more closely without causing you further resentment.

I think admitting resentment is always a step towards freeing oneself of it;

when I find myself resenting something someone says, I try to

remember to look under my resentment; what is the real feeling in myself.

In letting go of it, I realize that it's for my benefit; not someone else.

 

If I resent something or someone, it's usually because I think they should

be wiser, or more aware; eventually I remember people act in accordance with their

abilities; that they're probably doing the very best they can with what they have.

When I remember— like them— that what I suffer is a result of my own limited abilities,

I find it much easier to forgive, and move on.

 

So— the limit of my awareness at present is seeing scientists as men and women

with a passion for the unknown material universe, who use the scientific

yardstick to uncover its mysteries; but then I see them use the same yardstick on

themselves, which, although quite logical, is nevertheless a monumental mistake.

I find it stunning that people with such remarkable intellects can be held so securely

in the cultural bondage of the materialistic fetters of a science, at the huge expense

of understanding themselves as spiritual beings.

 

And therein is a difference between you and me; I feel a need to discuss this idea;

and pointing out my feeling is the beginning of the discussion; not a conclusion.

 

 

Albert E. said that "cosmic religious feeling is the strongest and noblest incitement

to scientific research." I completely agree, and when I say scientists are the "ultimate religionists,"

it is in recognition of that "feeling." Of course it is not limited to scientists;

I certainly experience it as an artist, but my explorations are directed

more towards the spiritual than the material. But when scientists feel that,

I think they can more readily appreciate the wonders of the universe in a way

that is nearly transcendent of all other approaches to God.

 

Cheers,

—Saitia

[TheBigDog]

I have decided that I am a scientist. But I already knew that.

 

Bill

[Zythryn]

I had a hypothesis that I was a scientist once.

 

However the tests didn't back up the hypothesis:(

[CerebralEcstasy]

State the problem. What is the question you are concerned about? Am I a scientist?

Collect Information.

I'm working on a Bachelor of Science, collecting information from all sources. I have even been photographed while collecting information - hey it works for David Suzuki's credibility why not mine?!?!

 

Form a guess based on information - a hypothesis. A hypothesis is a possible explanation for a group of related observations.

One possible explanation to explain said group of observations, indicates a probability that I am a scientist.

Test the hypothesis. Your hypothesis is tested by making careful observations.

 

I have been observed frequenting labs, lectures, hanging out at chemistry.org, physics.org and hypography.com....

Draw a conclusion. The conclusion you make must relate directly to your observations. A conclusion is an explanation of the results of your testing. A theory is a statement of a hypothesis which seems to explain observations. That is, a theory has evidence to support it. A theory can be changed if better evidence is available. Scientific theories are constantly being revised as new information is discovered.

I have concluded that since my actions indicate there could be some validity to this hypothesis - I am indeed a scientist, this of course could change, as new information emerges.

[Tormod]

]I have concluded that since my actions indicate there could be some validity to this hypothesis - I am indeed a scientist, this of course could change, as new information emerges.

 

Now, what predictions can you make from your hypothesis? You know a hypothesis only becomes a theory when it can be used to make predictions.

 

"I will win the Nobel Prize" does not apply. :lol:

[ronthepon]

And what if you want to be a scientist and have a sinking feeling in the pit of the stomach that it may prove to be too difficult?

[IDMclean]

That is called anxiety, or apprehension. A man by the name of James Lincoln Collier wrote a beautiful essay regarding that, Anxiety: Challenge by Another Name. If you want to be a Scientist, and you question the nature of reality, then you are, in my book.

 

Every person here, who has answered this question honestly is IMHO a scientist. A hypothesis was posed, they then responded with a question to themselves, scrutinized the output and then gave a conclusion. It may not have been exact scietific method but it's good enough for me.

 

So chin up, you can make of the world whatever you want to. Just cause other people say you ain't a scientist doesn't mean that you aren't. I have the offical credientials of a highschool physical science student. That doesn't in my opinion negate nearly now 14 years of study. I may not be able to show a diploma, but for them most part I know my stuff better than most Masters.

[CerebralEcstasy]

Now, what predictions can you make from your hypothesis? You know a hypothesis only becomes a theory when it can be used to make predictions.

 

"I will win the Nobel Prize" does not apply. :Waldo:

 

Drat, I was going to use that one.

 

What about the claim of another peer? I was once told by my physics professor that if I could get my math skills together, I could win a Nobel Prize.

 

(personally my analytical mind wondered whether or not he meant it, or whether it was part of some elaborate ploy to make me want to sleep with him - I never stopped to test my hypothesis, I was more interested in the course being taught)

 

However, if others are already supporting my hypothesis (whether they are doing it for pure or impure motives), and making similar predictions to my own, this pushes it one step closer to becoming a theory does it not?

 

One prediction I can make is that I will have a document on my wall sometime next year that will predict my future success as said scientist.

 

I also predict that prior to this happening, my hair will resemble Albert Einstein's. Or at least Gene Wilder's from Frankenstein.

 

[IDMclean]

Mine already does. I have no papers, but I am a scientist none the less, and in my humble opinion a scientist of excellence. I may not follow exact procedure, but then again I find structures that are to ridgit confining and sufficating of my art.

[Edella]

I may not follow exact procedure, but then again I find structures that are to ridgit confining and sufficating of my art.

 

Procedure,rigidity and structure are inherent to the Scientific Method KAC.There may be an artistic aspect to it,but dont confuse science and art.Don't be this guy:http://www.theonion.com/content/node/49180

[IDMclean]

That would classify as extreame to me.

 

I walk a balanced path. Such that:

[math]1=1/1[/math]

[Pyrotex]

I apologize for my outburst, and for any offense, resentment or anyother unpleasant side effect of my outburst, but I was moved by compassion and conviction. Keep in mind please, that I try to accomidate ALL views within my own, so that I may better understand.

Don't apologize. In fact, that was one of the best, most cogent and moving posts I have ever seen you make.

[Pyrotex]

I did not class myself as a "scientist". I guess I have an unreasonable standard for that word. I consider a scientist as one who is doing real "research". Not scientist as a lable of intention, but a label of professional action. I have a degree in Physics but I never "worked" as a physicist. I work in aerospace engineering, mostly software systems and systems analysis; I can't quite see that as "science". I will never find a new law of nature, but I might create a breakthrough in elegant graphic user interfaces, or a new way of organizing engineering information.

 

I would MUCH rather write a successful science fiction novel. :shrug: