Scientific Method

Four Methods of Knowing

The American philosopher and scientist Charles Sanders Peirce maintained that there are four general ways of establishing beliefs. The poorest of these, the method of tenacity, involves a person stubbornly clinging to a familiar idea when challenged. The belief is sustained by an attitude of tenacity and unquestioned acceptance. The method of authority maintains that ideas are held to be true simply because they are the ideas of a person who is deemed an expert or perceived to be in a position of power. Peirce noted that this method is superior to the method of tenacity, because some beliefs can be fixed by adopting the method. The a priori method, which is better than both of the methods just mentioned, involves an [Page 1326]appeal to the powers of reason independent of scientific observation. It involves accepting beliefs on the grounds that they are intuitive, self-evident, and based on reason rather than experience. The method of science is the method that Peirce himself advocated. It is superior to the other three methods because it establishes belief by appeal to an external reality and not to something merely human. Unlike the other methods, which are pre-scientific, the method of science has the characteristic of self-correction because it has built-in checks along the way. For Peirce, only this method has the ability to lead eventually to the truth.

Criticisms of the Idea of Scientific Method

Despite the importance of method in science, the idea that there is a scientific method characteristic of scientific inquiry has been the subject of many criticisms. Perhaps the most frequently voiced criticism of scientific method is that there is no such thing as the scientific method; that is, there can be no fixed universal account of scientific method appropriate for all disciplines and at all times. This criticism should be readily accepted because it speaks against an unrealistic view of scientific method.

...