/sci/ - Science & Math

But then through discovering new ways of thinking about what is already known you would discover new data.

i thought /sci/ was supposed to be smart. is no one here willing to answer this statement?

>>3200157
i see what you did there

>>3200147
Define new ways of thinking.

>>3200158
>complaining /sci/ has failed less than 2 minutes after the thread was posted
cool story bro.

and no, new ways of thinking dont matter. method is urrelevant so long as you get the right answer. knowing facts and data is important and useful.

This is just valuing meta-reasoning and meta-inquiry over reasoning and inquiry.

You need them both. Saying one is more important than the other is silly.

Yep i agree
Considering every detail of banging rocks together is more important in every way than all of modern industry science medicine and technology

>>3200168
>nowing facts and data is important and useful.
And that is why finding good methods is important.

Let's all just get along.

>>3200170
/thread

>>3200167
it's open to interpretation

ill give my personal opinion:
as the definition of 'new ways of thinking' is totally open to interpretation, im going to assume that it basically means thinking and analyzing about facts and then applying them somehow.

i think that its more important to explore more about what we already know than finding new raw information because if you just keep on finding raw information, youre never gonna put it to any use. it will be just there. whereas, if you think about using them, you will actually use information which you currently have. then, after youre done with it, only then you should find new stuff.
i realize that this isnt how it works thats why i prioritize utilizing knowns over discovering unknowns.

an example of this would be mankind's current space exploration program. i feel we should learn more about the moon and colonize it first before we go and start digging around in mars.

I dunno, I think that we need to gather some new data to see if that's true.