How Ignorance Drives Science #3

Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “How Ignorance Drives Science #3” [Hake (2013)]. The abstract reads:

ABSTRACT: I recently became aware of Stuart Firestein’s (2012) http://bit.ly/198nbyH Ignorance: How It Drives Science at http://bit.ly/15NqzM1 - the introduction is online at http://bit.ly/13wLAFE.

Here Firestein means by “ignorance” (in his own words) “a particular condition of knowledge: the absence of fact, understanding, insight, or clarity about something. . . . . . This is knowledgeable ignorance, perceptive ignorance, insightful ignorance.” To most scientists Firestein's “ignorance” is simply “stupidity” - see e.g., the signature quotes.

My own three decades worth of experience as a solid-state physicist is consistent with Firestein’s thesis that “ignorance” (as defined above and called by scientists “stupidity”) drives science - see e.g., “Early History of High Field Superconductivity: 1930-1967 - A Tragicomedy in Twelve Acts” [Hake (2011)] at http://bit.ly/ojnMqo (8.8 MB), especially the Epilogue on page 28, wherein I give quotes supporting Firestein’s thesis by scientists Berlincourt, Brush, Dyson, and Pippard.

In this post I also give links to further evidence in support of Firestein's thesis:

A. Three abstracts of discussion-list posts:
a. “Re: Should the History of Science Be Rated X?” [Hake (2012a)] at http://bit.ly/NclPUR;
b. “Should the History of Science Be Rated X? ADDENDA” [Hake (2012b)] at http://bit.ly/NUe6LC; and
c. “Can Education Research Be 'Scientific'? What's 'Scientific'? ” [Hake (2012c)]at http://bit.ly/YrZJUS.

B. Two books:
a. Real Science: What it is, and what it means [Ziman (2000)] at http://bit.ly/c8N2U1, especially Ziman's statement on p. 183 http://bit.ly/16OorRe “most scientists would say that their research is directed into specific AREAS OF IGNORANCE” - My CAPS.
b. Out of the Crystal Maze: Chapters from The History of Solid State Physics [Hoddeson et al. (1992)] at http://bit.ly/195zbRk.

*******************************************

To access the complete 17 kB post please click on http://yhoo.it/17rfTBZ .

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Academia: http://bit.ly/a8ixxm
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
Google Scholar: http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3
Twitter: http://bit.ly/juvd52
Facebook: http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm
LinkedIn: http://linkd.in/14uycpW

“The pace of fundamental advance in physics is set by human STUPIDITY. The pace is, and always has been, very slow.”
- Freeman Dyson (1958), my CAPS

“If we wish to boast of our achievements, let us not point to the unerring pursuit of truth by a logically faultless thinking machine, but to the astonishing way in which truth can be caused to emerge from the toils of error and STUPIDITY.”
- A.B. Pippard (1977), my CAPS

REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 19 July 2013.]
Hake, R.R. 2013. “How Ignorance Drives Science #2” online on the OPEN! Net-Gold archives at http://yhoo.it/17rfTBZ. Post of 19 Jul 2013 16:06:12-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being distributed to various discussion lists.

Math Education Research Doesn't Exist? Response to Schremmer

Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Math Education Research Doesn't Exist? Response to Schremmer” [Hake (2012)]. The abstract reads:

****************************************
ABSTRACT: MathEdCC’s Alain Schremmer at http://bit.ly/VNUvPV opined that: (a) research in mathematics education does not exist; (b) physics cannot be taught as lecture only; (c) Hake (2002b) at http://bit.ly/VtXvAV disagreed with Greeno (2002a) at http://bit.ly/T64H49 because Hake is unfamiliar with math education and thinks its problems are similar to those in physics education.

I argue in opposition to the above that:

(a) Research in mathematics education does exist, see e.g., the 18 entries preceded by double asterisks ** in the REFERENCE list of my complete post at http://bit.ly/U7dJi3.

(b) Physics has been taught essentially as lecture only (where taught does not mean learned), witness the fourteen “traditional” (T) courses (N = 2084) in Hake (1998a) at http://bit.ly/9484DG.

(c) I disagreed with Greeno, not because of my unfamiliarity math education, but because Greeno denounced as “glibly superficial and badly unknowing about the nature of science” the six guiding principles suggested in Scientific Research in Education at http://bit.ly/VjrQaV, as underlying all education research; whereas I think those principles are consistent with the nature of science as I have experienced it and as has been explained by Ziman (2002) at http://bit.ly/VtdoHR.
****************************************

To access the complete 21 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/U7dJi3.


Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Academia: http://bit.ly/a8ixxm
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
Twitter: http://bit.ly/juvd52

“He . . . .[or she]. . . . that wrestles with us strengthens our nerves, and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.”
Edmund Burke (1790)


REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 06 Nov 2012.]
Burke, E. 1790. Reflections on the Revolution in France. Available as a 2006 edition by Dover; Amazon.com information at http://amzn.to/c4wbfS. Online at http://bit.ly/fjYUfD thanks to Questia. See also the Wikipedia entry at http://bit.ly/hMaGfn.

Hake, R.R. 2012. “Math Education Research Doesn't Exist? Response to Schremmer” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/U7dJi3. Post of 6 Nov 2012 11:12:48-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.