| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Frogs to Princes - Some questions for John |
| Posted by: | John Schertzer |
| Date/Time: | 20/04/2004 21:44:32 |
|
In rocket science how is one to test the integrity of a fuselage without using the desired propellent, or the appropriate nosecone and fins? The problem with the scientific method sometimes is numerous variables need to be present to test one. That's why the developers of NLP worked with through a process of elimination, rather than addition, to find what was necessary to the model. You can't take it piece by piece, say rep system matching, unless you've constructed the context in which rep system matching is effective, which involves other types of matching and a particular kind of observation that usually needs to be learned and practiced. So if these studies are to be truly rigorous, the researchers would need to understand the interdependence of elements, and account for it. That's something I haven't seen in any of them. And that's why so much of cognitive "science" will never amount to anything in the long run, so fixated it is on being "science." Ho ho!! |