Hello,
I would like to help with the Zeteticism page.
I am not clear on how a zetetic can design an experiment or interpret results and feel that something more should be added to make this less confusing.
"Zeteticism differs from the usual scientific method in that using zeteticism one bases his conclusions on experimentation and observation rather than on an initial theory that is to be proved or disproved"
I am unsure how the usual (Newtonian?) scientific method differs. A question arises, an experiment is formed, observations are made and these indicate a likely truth.
"the zetetic does not make a hypothesis suggesting that the Earth is round or flat and then proceed testing that hypothesis; he skips that step and devises an experiment"
Skipping the step of testing and... experimenting? Is an experiment not a test?
"more reasonable method than the normal scientific method because it removes any preconceived notions and biases the formation of a hypothesis might cause, and leaves the conclusion up entirely to what is observed"
I don't know how preconceived notions can be absent in the forming of an experiment.
For example, I notice... No... I don't notice something and don't think about it, but I design an experiment to test the thing I am not thinking about...
I can't make an example, which is why i'm lost.
"Samuel Rowbotham was the first to use the term in reference to Flat Earth research. He devised the Bedford Level Experiment to determine whether the surface of water is convex, reasoning that if the water is not convex the earth cannot be a sphere."
This would be designing an experiment based on a preconceived notion, which is the usual scientific method. I may be misunderstanding that he coined the word, but did not choose to practice it.
I know Pete doesn't like partial references, but I feel these maintained context.
I definitely need help with this one, and so will others.
Edit: added some.