1
$\begingroup$

In what ways does intuition from subjective experience guide topic choice in neuroscience? How important is it to frame research questions quantitatively? Can our own beliefs about how we think bias what topics are studied in neuroscience?

$\endgroup$

closed as off-topic by Remi.b, kmm, WYSIWYG Dec 8 '16 at 8:31

  • This question does not appear to be about biology within the scope defined in the help center.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • $\begingroup$ Beliefs can always bias a study. Questions and Studies should have some numerical base to be considered scientific, in that sense they use measurements and statistics, using standards statistics methods and a numerical deviation in the certainty of the results, i.e. to within 5 percent. The first question is vague. Topic choice is vague, for students, researchers, reading materials. For students it's course based and for researchers it's interest/finance/other based. $\endgroup$ – com.prehensible Dec 7 '16 at 6:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Can you please specify why your question is specific to neuroscience? I think this is a question of philosophy of knowledge and the nature of human bias in the scientific methodology. Such question (especially if refined) would be on topic on Philosophy.SE but not here. I am voting to close. $\endgroup$ – Remi.b Dec 7 '16 at 8:55
  • $\begingroup$ Belief will always bias topic choice in science. Because, if we would know everything about it already we don't need to study it. If we don't know everything, there is just the belief that there is more interesting stuff to be known. It's not like I ask a computer to randomly generate letters until it spells out a possible research topic. $\endgroup$ – skymningen Dec 7 '16 at 12:20
  • $\begingroup$ Of course. Our beliefs govern what topics we study, we look for the proof of existing hypothesis and tend to blindly blunder toward what we "know to be true" ignoring all indications to the contrary. We set out to prove what we believe, it's all very artificial. However, ironically this could be correct because there is a psychological argument to suggest that what we believe governs what becomes anyway. $\endgroup$ – Bella Pines Jan 9 '17 at 21:23