Cf: In the Way of Inquiry • Justification Trap
There is a particular type of “justification trap” a person can fall into,
of trying to prove the scientific method by solely deductive means, that is,
of trying to show the scientific method is a good method by starting from the
simplest possible axioms, principles everyone would accept, about what is good.
Often this happens, in spite of the fact one really knows better, simply in
the process of arranging one's thoughts in a rational order, say, from the
most elementary and independent to the most complex and derivative, as if
for the sake of a logical and summary exposition. But when does this
rearrangement cease to be a rational reconstruction and start to become
a destructive rationalization, a distortion of the genuine article, and
a falsification of the authentic inquiry it attempts to recount?
Sometimes people express their recognition of this trap and their appreciation
of the factor it takes to escape it by saying there is really no such thing as
the scientific method, that the very term “scientific method” is a misnomer and
does not refer to any kind of method at all, in sum, the development of knowledge
cannot be reduced to any fixed method because it involves in an essential way such
a large component of non-methodical activities. If one's idea of what counts as
method is fixed on the ideal of a deductive procedure then it's no surprise one
draws that conclusion.