Gabriel Marcel Quotes

Science has authority, not because of white coats, or titles, but because of precision and transparency: you explain your theory, set out your evidence, and reference the studies that support your case.

One of the distinguishing features of anything that aspires to the name of science is the reproducibility of experimental results.

Measurements, observations, descriptions can only be considered scientific when they are independently confirmed by other people.

The heart of science is measurement.

Science isn't about authority or white coats; it's about following a method. That method is built on core principles: precision and transparency; being clear about your methods; being honest about your results; and drawing a clear line between the results, on the one hand, and your judgment calls about how those results support a hypothesis.

The scientific method actually correctly uses the most direct evidence as the most reliable, because that's the way you are least likely to get led astray into dead ends and to misunderstand your data.

Science is based on the possibility of objectivity, on the possibility of different people checking out for themselves the observations made by others. Without that possibility, there is no empirical principle capable of deciding between different arguments and theories.

I time everything. I'm a scientist at heart.

Science cannot progress without reliable and accurate measurement of what it is you are trying to study. The key is measurement, simple as that.

Scientific method isn't about winning popularity contests. It's also not about being with the majority opinion. It isn't supposed be determined by politics. It is about attempting to limit bias or prejudice in the results

Either data supports the observations or they don't. Voting doesn't work in science.

Refining is inevitable in science when you have made measurements of a phenomenon for a long period of time.

Science is objective. And in my view we cannot take any experimental results seriously except in the light of good explanations of them.

When all is said and done, science actually takes hard work and a willingness to sometimes find out that your most cherished hypothesis is wrong.

Science has a culture that is inherently cautious and that is normally not a bad thing. You could even say conservative, because of the peer review process and because the scientific method prizes uncertainty and penalises anyone who goes out on any sort of a limb that is not held in place by abundant and well-documented evidence.

I love science. I hate supposition, superstition, exaggeration and falsified data. Show me the research, show me the results, show me the conclusions - and then show me some qualified peer reviews of all that.

In my grandfather's lab, scientists did independent research, and peers reviewed and commented on its merits. Politics, he taught me, had no place in the scientific process.

Our empirical criterion for a series of theories is that it should produce new facts. The idea of growth and the concept of empirical character are soldered into one.

Writers don't have to keep themselves honest. They have to keep themselves accurate.

But there is only one surefire method of proper pattern recognition, and that is science.

Part of our western outlook stems from the scientific attitude and its method of isolating the parts of a phenomenon in order to analyze them.

Subjectivism is not an absolute principle; it is a necessary but not sufficient condition for sound methodology.

Science is true, whether you believe it or not.

A good scientific theory is one which is falsifiable, which has not been falsified.

My parents are both scientists. They like order.