>>19262611actually there isn't really much you can do with data alone without a good, universal or widely applicaple model of reality. the stuff
lets say i just conducted a drug testing study
now we rename that drug
do i need another study to see if its effective?
do i need another study to see if another drug with this drugs old name is still effective?
do we need to conduct another study on this question?
do we need another study to see if any of this is still true at a later point in time?
there is no scientific data or studies that directly tell us any of is, only models. it all comes down to the "base" natural sciences physics and chemistry. without it your data is useless. these are also not remotely comparable to something to something like pharmacology (let alone psychology) which shouldnt be a considered a hard science
its really annoying that in the eyes of some people "uhh a study has found that (...)" seems to be as compelling as the laws of nature because you can use the word "science"
