Today in class we had an interesting discussion on truth and how we find it. Obviously, the researchers presenting the material in our textbook suggested the scientific method as the closest path to finding truth, and in class we discussed a more spiritual method as well. (Not to say we discredited the scientific method, though.) The reading for next class discussed various theories that guide thinking on intimate relationships (okay: moment of self-congratulation! I've done half my reading for Monday's class! I'm trying to take into account my 44 pages of reading for Tuesday's class, because I'll have to write a 1-2 page paper on that reading by 10 AM on Tuesday). The chapter started with an argument that great minds do not think alike: the theory determines much of the thinking process.
Well that brought me back to our discussion on truth and the scientific method. A crucial part of the scientific method is theory; we discussed in class an example of a study where the researcher chose to base her 'experiment' on a feminist theory where men and women are essentially created the same. What does this prove? Had this researcher based her experiment on a different way of thinking, such as the evolutionary theory I just read about, her findings may have been different. (She and her colleagues were basically testing the book Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus to see if it held any water compared to scientific findings.) I've had professors bring up the excellent point that some theories work better in certain situations, but I suppose what I'm considering now is all this "scientific literature" that we have available: does it contain credibility when examined by someone looking through the lens of each different theory? Sure, some theories just aren't compatible with other ones, but you can definitely try and find a solution to one problem through many different theories.
I realize this is probably very dry to someone who, well, isn't immersed in these classes as I am. I'm not saying you need to be a family scientist to find it interesting, but anyone not in a scientific field, and perhaps those in more "concrete" science (in other words, not social science), probably wouldn't know or care what I'm talking about. Oh well.
So in other news I'm trying to gather my courage to start the dishes. I don't know why I'm balking so much; it's not like I would end up doing all of them anyway. I guess standing there usually makes my feet get super uncomfortable.... I could try wearing shoes, since I seem to stand in one place for long enough at work before I get really uncomfortable.
... yes, I am a wimp. I'm sorry you had to witness that, but it's true. I almost didn't eat a real dinner because I couldn't find the means or inclination to fix myself something easy. (Except maybe mac'n'cheese, but that's hardly a real dinner anyway.) My salvation was in a container of ill-loved leftovers that I thought would be just fine, since it meant I didn't have to cook. Isn't that sad? At least I can blame pregnancy, right?... Hah.
The other good news is that Gary and I are going to the temple tomorrow morning. Yay temple! My dress even still fits, though it's a little funny looking. It's a good thing, too, because renting one for more than three months almost doesn't seem worth it. I wonder how long I'll be able to get away with my current one.
No comments:
Post a Comment