Methods as rules for the mind

When Spinoza was working on his Treatise on the Emendation of the Intellect, he intended to write a method that would lead to true knowledge. In this blog I’ll ignore what true knowledge is. It’s even debatable whether such a thing exists. However, also in case there is no true knowledge in science and the humanities, we can consider it an ideal that we strive for. Then the question is: What is a good method that will bring us true knowledge? According to Spinoza, a good method “shows us how the mind should be directed, according to the standard of the given true idea.” (38) But what is the standard of the given true idea? I think that much can be said about it, but I find Spinoza’s description of method in his Treatise vague and obscure and of little help for modern thinking. However, Spinoza at least tried to answer the question what a method is. In later discussions until today it has often been ignored, even when it was essential (for example even Hempel and Popper didn’t define method). This a strange, for if we are talking about methods and their use – and methods are the heart of science and the humanities –, isn’t it then important to know what we are talking about?

In order to answer this question on method, I think that especially Abraham Kaplan’s The conduct of inquiry is useful. In this book, Kaplan distinguishes two kinds of methodology, namely a methodology that studies specific practical scientific techniques and a methodology that studies the general philosophical principles behind these techniques. Only in the latter case Kaplan talks of methods, and therefore I think that it would be better to call the other type of methodology a theory of techniques. So while techniques are things like questionnaires, experiments or scales, following Kaplan we can define methods as the “logical or philosophical principles sufficiently specific to relate especially to science as distinguished from other human enterprises or interests. [They] include such procedures as forming concepts and hypotheses, making observations and measurements, performing experiments, building models and theories, providing explanations, and making predictions” (Kaplan, 1964: 23; italics mine). In short, techniques are concrete and apply to this or that research or investigation; methods are abstract and basically they apply to all sciences and humanities or at least to a significant part of them.

Of course, much more can said about this, but I think it is enough for this blog. Although I don’t want to give an interpretation of Spinoza’s definition here in the sense of explaining what Spinoza meant, I think that Kaplan’s description of method can give an interpretation of Spinoza’s definition that satisfies us. Spinoza says that a good method should “show us how the mind should be directed, according to the standard of the given true idea”. (see above) Now we can say that a good method should give us the logical or philosophical principles and procedures that lead our mind to true knowledge. In this sense, methods are rules for the mind.

Just one more thing. Some people say that science is just another opinion. And then these people set the facts as they see them against the scientific facts they don’t agree with. I think that this is not a correct approach if you want to reject scientific results. This approach assumes that science is about facts, although actually science is about methods (and techniques as well): The essence of science is the right method. So if you think that a scientific result is not correct, false or even fake, basically you must not attack the result but the way that led to this result, so the method. Only if you have shown that the method used is not right, or that mistakes have been made in its application (or the same so for the techniques used) you have shown that a result is not correct or even fake.

Sources

- Full texts in English of Spinoza’s Treatise on the Emendation of the Intellect: http://www.yesselman.com/teielwes.htm

- Kaplan, Abraham, The conduct of inquiry. Methodology for behavioral science. Scranton, Penna.: Chandler Publishing Cy.,1964.