Empiricist Pick-Up Techniques

by Ariel F. Wickham, M.S.

If you're like me - and I know I am - then you've heard the rap that science gets.  It's cold, heartless, and uninteresting.  Well, boys and girls, I'm here to tell you that that's just a big pile of overly dogmatic bullshit.
Science - and this is a well-kept secret that I'm letting you in on here - is fun.

You see, the soul of science is empiricism; empiricism is just a fancy word for finding things out for yourself, using your own senses to perform experiments on the world.  That's right: if you're an empiricist, you get to mess with things, just to try to figure them out  It's societally sanctioned.

So let me give you an example.

Let's say you see this really cute woman.  But it occurs to you that she might not actually be a woman.

She might, in fact, be a chicken.

Go up to your subject and ask.  If you're lucky, she'll answer.  But don't take anyone's word for it - that's not what empiricism is about.

No, empiricism is about finding stuff out using your own senses.  Just hearing someone say "I'm not a chicken" isn't sufficient for the truly intrepid empiricist.

Now, consider what you know about chickens.

Focus in on the last one: they have no lips.  If the person you're talking to is actually a chicken, then she, too, will have no lips.  It's a scientific fact.

Now, how are you going to find out if s/he has lips?  Well, if you're an empiricist, you'll have to test this directly with your own senses.  If she looks like she has lips, that's a good sign.  But they might be faked.  Thousands of chickens have discovered the techinque of wearing fake lips - they learned it from Robin in that last Batman movie.  So sight isn't gonna be enough.

No, you'll need the kind of scientific information that only your tactile sense can give you.  To truly be certain that she's not a chicken, you'll have to kiss her.

See?  Empiricism makes you kiss people.  Especially cute people, when they might be chickens.
Now, science is also about replication.  So kiss her again.  To be truly certain, you should supplement your evidence with information from another experimental paradigm.  This is the point where you say "well, you seem to have lips, which is consistent with the theory that you aren't a chicken.  Why don't we go check for feathers, just for replication's sake?"

If you're feeling efficient, you can check for wings at the same time.  But that won't get you as much grant money.

Happy experimenting!

Next time: Ariel Delves the Mysteries of the Shake Machine



Excerpted from Young Hozhed, Volume 1, Issue 1. Want to see more? 
Download the full version of our lovingly formatted and art-fully playful zine. 
It's just an Acrobat file; it won't hurt you.
Copyright on all work retained by Kallisti Press and the original authors.


Back to: Kallisti Press (or) the current issue of  Young Hozhed.
Last updated: May 16, 1998 by jeliza@cs.cmu.edu