Questions in question:
- Is it possible to conduct scientific research without actually getting close to the sample/specimen?
- Is it possible to have a scientific review of a method if the author doesn't have direct experience of it?
My questions are:
- Why are these questions subjective? I thought that the scientific method is quite rigid. One can easily based on that to conclude whether a procedure can produce scientific conclusion or not?
- Even if they are subjective, why wouldn't they be good subjective questions?
According to that article, great subjective questions:
- inspire answers that explain “why” and “how”
- tend to have long, not short, answers
- have a constructive, fair, and impartial tone
- invite sharing experiences over opinions
- insist that opinion be backed up with facts and references
- are more than just mindless social fun
Which items these questions are lacking to make them be bad subjective questions? Or maybe they don't invite sharing experiences over opinions and insist that opinion be backed up with facts and references enough?