B Overview
Initially, I wanted to get to the bottom of why many of us have difficulty with the hypothesis, and I felt that I should try to defend it as an irreplaceable part of the scientific enterprise.
A lot that I learned in writing the book surprised me: Who would have guessed, for example, that a majority of working scientists have had almost no formal instruction about scientific thinking or that word “hypothesis” has been virtually expunged from much of the pre-college science curriculum? I want to share stories like that as well.There are many books on the general topic of critical thinking (For Dummies3; For Kids!4) that will teach you to make better decisions and solve problems, help you tell honest science apart from pseudoscience, or improve your life in countless other ways. The goal of this book is more modest: it seeks to explore and explain the concept of the scientific hypothesis in enough depth to reveal its complexity and its value while, at the same time, demystifying it. Above all, I hope to show why it is such a useful tool for the craft of science. Acquiring expertise in using the hypothesis does not come naturally to most of us—I'll inquire into the reasons that it doesn't and suggest ways of enhancing your skills.
Although it assumes no special experience or background, the book was written with science students, teachers, mentors, and administrators in mind. Yet most of the issues regarding scientific thinking are broadly applicable, and I believe that general readers who are interested in the intersection of science and philosophy, or who want better insight into what science is up to, may gain new perspectives as well. Many of the examples that I use are generic and nonscientific. My own background is in biomedical sciences, specifically neuroscience, and I am familiar with how the hypothesis is viewed in this area when it comes to experimental design, grant applications, journal articles, teaching, etc.
As a public that is constantly bombarded with science news, its triumphs and peccadillos, we need to know how to think about what's going on in science.The book is divided into three parts. Part I (Chapters 1-9) lays out what the modern scientific hypothesis is, what it can and can't do, addresses misconceptions surrounding it, and reports the results of two original surveys that I conducted to find out how scientists think about and use the hypothesis. When I asked several hundred scientists about the amount of formal instruction in the scientific method, the hypothesis, hypothesis-testing, and so on, that they had received, I found that their experience was like mine: the instruction was minimal when there was any at all. Nevertheless, we're apparently supposed to know all about these things. Part II (Chapters 10-12) covers problems—actual and alleged—with hypothesis-based science, and evaluates overt opposition, and suggested alternative approaches, to using hypotheses. I'll also explore cognitive factors, including biases, that help explain why working with the hypothesis is so unnatural for most of us. Finally, in Part III (Chapters 13-15), I make suggestions for sharpening your skills in scientific thinking, especially in using the hypothesis, as well as suggest a few policy changes that might bring some clarity to national issues. In Chapter 15, I'll take up the specific challenge that Big Data poses for conventional scientific thinking.
The influence of Karl Popper's thought on the practice of science is inescapable, albeit controversial. It permeates this book, and you can't truly follow the debate about the hypothesis in science without knowing what he actually said— and what he said is frequently misrepresented. It is important to correct the record. We also need to learn about Popper's thought to see how it meshes with other modern modes of doing science and how it fits into the grand scheme of things. Hypothesis-testing is not the only way of doing science (Chapter 4); however, this fact does not mean that you have to choose among them. By the end of the book, I hope to have sorted out the advantages and disadvantages of the various modes.
Although it is centered on the hypothesis, the book is not a monolith or a novel, and you don't have to read it straight through. For instance, students and teachers might want to focus on Chapters 1-5, 8, and 14; the philosophically minded might choose Chapters 1-3, 5-12, and 15; scientists perhaps Chapters 1-9 and 14; policy makers could add Chapter 13; and so on.
If this sounds interesting, then you may want to go to Chapter 1 if you'd like details. A precis of each chapter follows.
I.