¿Es procedente que en ciencia (y en derecho) prepondere el asunto de LA COMPROBACIÓN EXPERIMENTAL? / Is it appropriate that in science (and in law) the issue of EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION prevails?
Este post trata del problema que lleva consigo la creencia de que la comprobación (pieza de oro de la ciencia -y también de la criminalística, por cierto-) implica necesariamente que se experimente. Tal criterio deja por fuera la enorme riqueza que encarna la valoración que el investigador (o el juez) haga sobre la concomitancia que presentan los factores (ya acontecidos en el tiempo) cuya relación se desea -de alguna manera- determinar con objetividad.
This post deals with the problem that carries with it the belief that verification (a golden piece of science - and also criminology, by the way -) necessarily implies that it is experienced. Such a criterion leaves out the enormous richness embodied in the assessment that the researcher (or the judge) makes of the concomitance presented by the factors (already occurred in time) whose relationship is desired - in some way - to be determined objectively.
b It has been a constant concern in our academic work for many decades, to discuss the frontiers that science, philosophy and the plethora of manifestations that theory acquires in terms of the everyday, the circumstantial, the hot (that is, the that some call ideology, others, vulgar thought, in short). As we know, the factor that marks science is fundamentally the objectification of the knowledge that is being forged in the research effort. Objectification that is exposed (in the so-called final speech of the investigative work) cleanly honoring a certain logic. As we also know, the factor that marks both philosophy and ideology, is -by contrast- speculation, brooding, open reflection -without bridges-.
Well. When we speak of objectification we are referring more than anything to the verification that in the scientific effort is made, about the relationships established by the factors of the object studied. Relationships that in the best of cases have to trace something significant of causality. If in the very small town "X" of country "Z" there is currently a generalized picture of type "5" diarrhea and the inhabitants of this small town drink dirty water from the nearest lagoon, and in the face of such social picture There are some researchers, they probably measure quantitatively (without losing sight of qualitative elements) each of these variables, thus being able to make some precision about the level of relationship that they actually register.
The idea that generally prevails, especially in research on phenomena that have already occurred, is that objectification "is achieved" if the variables whose relationship has been statistically verified (by some elementary or complex correlation procedure), enough, is enough ... Ah, but it happens that the variables in play may objectively register a sufficient correlation, and there is no causality in it, but simple concomitance ... yes, only simple company! We used to tell our students - many years ago - that their presence in the class is total and that everyone (male and female) wears shoes. Between one thing and another, we said, there is a total correlation, but not a causal one; only concomitant-simple.
We could then ask ourselves ... Is it that in order to investigate scientifically (and thereby achieve objectification with transparency) it is strictly necessary to experiment, intentionally create the phenomenon under study in order to observe it, control it and determine the point to which an eventual relationship of factors, is it given? How do criminal judges, for example, establish sentences? It is obvious that they cannot experiment and yet they send the accused to jail or acquit them.
Undoubtedly, in science and in life itself, objectification (verification, verification) is a piece of diamond, but also the human criterion of evaluation when concomitance speaks, gives clues ... It speaks, gives clues to see dialectically the truth (or falsehood) ...
"Give me a foothold and I will move the world", Archimedes (Greek scientist and philosopher, 287 BC / 212 BC).
FUENTE DE LAS IMÁGENES: / SOURCE OF IMAGES:
https://pixabay.com/es/photos/mujer-la-p%C3%A9rdida-de-tristeza-3034934/
https://pixabay.com/es/vectors/matraz-experimento-37550/
https://pixabay.com/es/illustrations/abogado-balanza-de-la-justicia-juez-450205/
Your content has been voted as a part of Encouragement program. Keep up the good work!
Use Ecency daily to boost your growth on platform!
Support Ecency
Vote for Proposal
Delegate HP and earn more
¡Gracias!
Buenas, Su post ha sido propuesto para ser votado a lo largo del día por el witness @cervantes. Un saludo.
¡Gracias!
Congratulations @alexandermoreno! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Your next target is to reach 2000 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOP