| Summary: | ABSTRACTThis paper argues that all scientific research is framed by one of two organizing principles that underpin and shape almost every aspect of scientific research as well as nonscientific inquiry. The most commonly employed principle within mainstream science is content determines content. This is a closed, circular principle that is usually unstated within hypotheses but plays a major role in developing methodologies and arriving at conclusions. The second more open principle is context determines content. This principle represents the implied background embedded within hypotheses. The difference between these two principles revolves around the issue of context, with the first principle closing off contexts by ignoring, erasing, or devaluing them, while the second more holistic principle explicitly takes them into account. Each of these research principles has a focus on the explicit detailed nature of ‘content’ while differing in relation to the source and cause of such content. We argue that the more open and holistic principle of context determines that content is superior in producing reliable evidence, results and conclusions.
|
|---|