Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Clin Chem. 2010 Jul;56(7):1080-5. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2010.144477. Epub 2010 May 28.
Scientists are often steered by common convention, funding agencies, and journal guidelines into a hypothesis-driven experimental framework, despite Isaac Newton's dictum that hypotheses have no place in experimental science. Some may think that Newton's cautionary note, which was in keeping with an experimental approach espoused by Francis Bacon, is inapplicable to current experimental method since, in accord with the philosopher Karl Popper, modern-day hypotheses are framed to serve as instruments of falsification, as opposed to verification. But Popper's "critical rationalist" framework too is problematic. It has been accused of being: inconsistent on philosophical grounds; unworkable for modern "large science," such as systems biology; inconsistent with the actual goals of experimental science, which is verification and not falsification; and harmful to the process of discovery as a practical matter. A criticism of the hypothesis as a framework for experimentation is offered. Presented is an alternative framework-the query/model approach-which many scientists may discover is the framework they are actually using, despite being required to give lip service to the hypothesis.
科学家们常常受到常规、资金机构和期刊指南的引导，采用假设驱动的实验框架，尽管艾萨克·牛顿曾告诫说，假设在实验科学中没有地位。有些人可能认为，牛顿的这一告诫与弗朗西斯·培根所倡导的实验方法是一致的，不适用于现代实验方法，因为根据哲学家卡尔·波普尔的观点，现代的假设是为了作为证伪的工具，而不是验证的工具。但是，波普尔的“批判理性主义”框架也存在问题。它被指责为：在哲学上不一致；对于现代的“大科学”（如系统生物学）来说不可行；与实验科学的实际目标（即验证而不是证伪）不一致；在实践中对发现过程有害。本文对假设作为实验框架提出了批评。本文提出了一个替代框架——查询/模型方法——许多科学家可能会发现，尽管他们需要口头上支持假设，但这实际上是他们正在使用的框架。
