At that time, my awareness of science was heavily influenced by a classic commentary by Katch, 3 as expressed above. Yet before such content can be explained, what are some of the fundamental tenants of the scientific method, and why have I developed an interest in them? Approximately 15 years ago, contemplation of my prior reading and research led me to conclude that most of the science I was involved in seemed to operate disconnected from what I thought science should be. When aware of the fundamental tenants of the scientific method, numerous flaws within this commentary and by the journal are obvious and require constructive criticism. Unfortunately, my enthusiasm was short-lived. This is especially true in reference and application to the exercise sciences, and in particular the 20 years that have followed Noakes’ first account of his CGM, 2 and the 30 years since Katch’s provocative call for greater critical research enquiry within the exercise sciences. There is a need for more writing of the philosophical underpinnings of the scientific method. 1 Three phrases within the title immediately caught my attention, ‘Thomas Kuhn’s ‘The Structure of Scientific Revolutions’, ‘exercise science’, and of course the ‘Central Governor Model’ (CGM). It was with great enthusiasm that I discovered and commenced the reading of the commentary by Pires, ‘ Thomas Kuhn’s ‘Structure of Scientific Revolutions’ Applied to Exercise Science Paradigm Shifts: Example Including the Central Governor Model’. Until this happens for the CGM and all other pertinent paradigms within exercise physiology, the discipline will never rise out of the abyss of normal science to extraordinary science involving paradigm shifts and scientific revolutions. In addition, the wording of the CGM needs to allow scientists to make predictions that can then be tested in controlled experimental research studies. To support this development, the CGM needs to be more carefully worded to form a theory that clearly reveals key features that can be researched and potentially falsified. The inability to falsify a theory is the most meaningful way to prove that it is likely to be correct. To improve the scientific contributions of research on the CGM, fellow scientists need to adopt a more critical platform where questions are raised and research designs are employed in efforts to refute the theory. When contrasting the scientific philosophies of Kuhn to Popper, and applying the tenant of falsification to the research and commentary on the CGM, it is probable that the scholarship pertaining to the CGM adheres more to pseudoscience than science. Unfortunately, very little evidence was presented to support this notion, and a narrow view of scientific philosophy was used to reflect on the role of the CGM in understanding exercise physiology and the pursuit of a more ideal scientific method. This shift from predisposition to the characteristics of the event itself reduced guilt and blame, while the undermining of secondary gain made it easier to award financial compensation.A connection has been made to the possible role of the central governor model (CGM) to be a paradigm shift within the exercise sciences. From being the responsibility of the subject, traumatic illness became an external imposition and possibly a universal response to a terrifying and unexpected event. The recognition of PTSD reflected a diversion from the role of the group, in particular the "herd instinct", towards a greater appreciation of the individual's experience.
Secondary gain, the benefits often but not solely financial that a person derived as a result of being ill, was considered the principal cause of any observed failure to recover. The event served merely as a trigger to something that existed or was waiting to emerge. Enduring symptoms were explained in terms of hereditary predisposition, early maladaptive experiences or a pre-existing psychiatric disorder. Long-term effects, characterized as "traumatic neurosis", were regarded as abnormal. Hitherto, a normal psychological reaction to a terrifying event was considered short-term and reversible. The inclusion of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in DSM-III in 1980 represented a paradigm shift in the conceptualisation of post-trauma illness.
0 kommentar(er)
