I think we probably all agree here. I didn't mean to imply that there should not be experimentation on human activity, just cast a critical eye on the experimental design, the ones doing the research, and especially the reporters. I couldn't get to the original work at the site mentioned above, so anything else I say about that experiment is third hand speculation. (Besides, I don't understand all the protocol used in human experimentation.)

Amos, I just reread you statement, using the normal standard of material experimentation is not likely to produce a good rate of progress. I don't think the experimental protocols are the same (in natural sciences and behavioral sciences), similar probably, but still with solid foundations. I think most researchers are aware of the pitfalls in transferring a method of research in one area (like physical science) to another (like human behavior) and thus define their studies carefully.

I vaguely remember some philosophical arguments about the traps of 20th century people and their perception of objectivity. As best I remember, the arguments are hard to follow because everyone is using different definitions. (That's why I usually don't bother to argue with anyone other than myself. *BG*)