This GREATLY depends on how one frames their own experiences, which we also do not get much information on from OP’s post. If someone is merely seeking validation for their conclusions which they claim their experience points at conclusively, then they are FAR from the scientific method.
In fact, I’d argue the wording does point to such logistic fallacies. They cite their own experiences, not something more removed from subjective experience.
“The obvious issues I deal with…” are BY DEFINITION subjective. This person, and you yourself, are failing to understand the scientific method.
My dude, if I don’t understand the scientific method you should call my boss and ask to have me fired.
I’m not making assumptions based on context that I don’t have. I’m offering possible alternative explanations, including that what they’re doing does not need to be scientifically rigorous.
Also, we’re missing context. You can observe issues that you deal with. You can use exaggerated language to describe it. It doesn’t mean the issues don’t exist. Maybe the issues are really obvious, and if we all knew the person, we would agree.
So the fact that they are observing an issue is not necessarily contrary to the scientific method. It could be with more context, but we don’t have that context here.
So the only point of contention is, is the context where the scientific method is required? If no, who cares? If yes, then it’s problematic but it also won’t pass peer review. But then, is it just for a class? If so, who cares? The teacher will shut them down and rightfully so. If no, peer review will catch it
This GREATLY depends on how one frames their own experiences, which we also do not get much information on from OP’s post. If someone is merely seeking validation for their conclusions which they claim their experience points at conclusively, then they are FAR from the scientific method.
In fact, I’d argue the wording does point to such logistic fallacies. They cite their own experiences, not something more removed from subjective experience.
“The obvious issues I deal with…” are BY DEFINITION subjective. This person, and you yourself, are failing to understand the scientific method.
My dude, if I don’t understand the scientific method you should call my boss and ask to have me fired.
I’m not making assumptions based on context that I don’t have. I’m offering possible alternative explanations, including that what they’re doing does not need to be scientifically rigorous.
Also, we’re missing context. You can observe issues that you deal with. You can use exaggerated language to describe it. It doesn’t mean the issues don’t exist. Maybe the issues are really obvious, and if we all knew the person, we would agree.
So the fact that they are observing an issue is not necessarily contrary to the scientific method. It could be with more context, but we don’t have that context here.
So the only point of contention is, is the context where the scientific method is required? If no, who cares? If yes, then it’s problematic but it also won’t pass peer review. But then, is it just for a class? If so, who cares? The teacher will shut them down and rightfully so. If no, peer review will catch it