1

Einstein says here

the researcher always starts out from facts, whose mutual connections are his aim, he does not find his system of ideas in a methodical, inductive way

Surely, I am thinking, Einstein means the facts of experience.

Is that right?

Improve this question
2
  • This is really hard to follow. Can you edit to make it clearer? The "not so! replies my interlocutor" seems to have bad punctuation or something. What do you claim the quote means versus what your interlocutor claims (in clearer language)? Also why are you bring creativity in during the last bit?
    – virmaior
    Commented Nov 8, 2015 at 13:28
  • I vote for reopen. After the original post has been edited, its question is clear and refers to a well-determined term of Einstein's statement. Thanks to the link to Einstein's original text it is also possible to get the context of the question.
    – Jo Wehler
    Commented Nov 8, 2015 at 16:13

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

You are right: Einstein means the facts from observation.

His point is that the researcher does not arrive at a theory by induction from the observational facts. But

The intuitive grasp of the essentials or a large complex of facts leads the scientist to the postulation of a hypothetical basic law, or several such basic laws.

Improve this answer
1
  • Another way to frame this is that he means facts, in the only well-defined sense of facts. Data = "those given" (in Latin), are observations about facts. Facts = "those made (constructed)" (in Latin roots), are interpretations of data. We like to ignore this distinction, but it is actually important.
    – user9166
    Commented Nov 9, 2015 at 23:35
0

Facts of observation aren't always facts of observation: I mean by this, that most facts a practising scientist like a Einstein would have worked wouldn't have been observations he personally made; he must, then have an authoritative source of facts he can rely on.

Can one say that Newtonian mechanics, and classical electromagnetism have been borne out by experiment; if so, then isn't this - a theory buttressed by facts - a fact too?

Improve this answer
1
  • thanks for the addition. actually the important point of the discussion that prompted the question, is whether the facts were ever empirical
    – user6917
    Commented Nov 10, 2015 at 11:51