3. The research is useful to others. An article that presents a new
finding on the behviour of the elementary particles of physic is useful. An
article that presents a transcription of an unpublished letter by the Italian
romantic poet Giacomo Leopardi, and that recounts the circumstances of its
discovery, is useful. A work is scientific if, in addition to fulfilling the
two conditions above, it advances the knowledge of the community, and if all
future works on the topic will have to take it into consideration, at least in
theory.
Naturally the scientific
relevance is commensurate with the contribution’s significance. Scholars must
take certain contributions into account in order to say anything relevant on a
particular topic, while they can leave others behind without serious
consequences. Recently, a number of letters from James Joyce to his wife have
been published, specifically letters that deal with explicit sexual matters.
People studying the origin of Molly Bloom’s character in Joyce’s Ulysses may
find it useful to know that, in his private life, Joyce attributed to his wife
a sexuality as vivacious and developed as Molly’s. Therefore, the publication
of these letters is a useful scientific contribution. On the other hand, some
superb interpretations of Ulysses present a keen analysis of Molly’s character
without this data. Therefore this contribution is not indispensable. We can
find an example of a more important scientific contribution in the publication
of Stephen Hero, the first version of
Joyce’s novel A Portrait of the Artist as
a Young Man. Stephen Hero is
generally considered fundamental for understanding the development of the Irish
writer, and is therefore a fundamental scientific contribution.
Here we should address the
so-called “laundry lists” often associated with extremely meticulous German
philologists. These might include an author’s shopping list, to-do list, and
other incidental texts that are generally of low value. Occasionally these
kinds of data are useful because they shed the light of humanity on a reclusive
author, or they reveal that during a certain period he lived in extreme
poverty. Other times these texts do not add anything to what we already know.
They are small biographical curiosities with no scientific value, even if there
are people who build reputations as indefatigable researchers by bringing these
trifles to light. We should not discourage those who enjoy pursuing this type
of research, but we also should understand that they are not advancing human
knowledge. From a pedagogical perspective, if not from a scientific one, it
would be more fruitful for them to write an entertaining popular biography that
recounted the author’s life and works.
4. The research provides the elements required to verify or disprove the
hypotheses it presents, and therefore it provides the foundation for future
research. This is a fundamental requirement. For example, to prove that
centaurs live in Peloponnesus I must do the following with precision: (a)
produce proof (as we have already said, at least a tail bone); (b) recount
exactly how I discovered and exhumed the archaeological find; (c) instruct
readers on how more evidence can be unearthed; and (d) if possible, give
examples of the precise type of bone (or other archaeological find) that would
disprove my hypothesis, were it to be discovered in the future. If I accomplish
these four goals, I have not only provided the evidence to support my
hypothesis, but I have facilitated the continuation of research that may
confirm or challenge it.
The same is true for any topic.
Suppose I am writing a thesis on an Italian extraparliamentary movement that
took place in 1969, and that is generally believed to have been politically
homogeneous. In my thesis, I wish to prove that there were in fact two
factions, one Leninist and the other Trotskyist. For my thesis to be
successful, I must produce documents (flyers, audio recordings of meetings,
articles, etc.) that verify my hypothesis; recount the circumstances of the
acquisition of this material to provide a foundation for further research; and
present the criteria by which I attribute the supporting documents to the
members of the 1969 movement. For example, if the group was dissolved in 1970,
I must weigh the relevance of material produced by membres while the group was
active against that produced by former membres of the group after its
dissolution, considering that they may have cultivated their ideas while the
group was still active. I must also define the criteria for group membreship,
such as actual registration, participation in meetings, and presumptions of the
police. In
doing this, I provide the foundation for further investigation, even if it may
eventually invalidate my own conclusions. For exmple, let us suppose
that I consider a person a membre of the grouup based on evidence from the
police, but future research exposes evidence that other membres never
considered the person in question as a membre, and therefore he should not be
judged as such. In this way, I have presented not only a hypothesis and supporting
evidence, but also methods for its verification and falsification.
No comments:
Post a Comment