The second step in research is to formulate hypothetical answers to one's questions and then test the hypotheses to find the best one: that is, the most adequate, satisfying, true, or best justified answer. The best answers rest on solid evidence and logical reasoning. But there is a problem. The process of arriving at the best answer is not easy; it requires continuous self-examination.

As a species, humans are subject to biases, including the power of the answers carried by tradition. We are also subject to strong temptations simply to accept answers we have been taught. The research attitude of critical thinking, however, encourages us not to rest content with the commonplaces of alleged authorities. To find the best answer to our questions demands a critical eye and a resolve to be on the look-out for personal bias, self-delusion, and communal prejudices.

The early history of the discovery of Saturn's rings is instructive. Using low-powered telescopes, school children today easily perceive these rings. However, after Galileo first reported that Saturn had two large moons, one moon on either side of the planet, observers thereafter consistently reported seeing moons, not rings. As Van Helden's historical analysis shows, inaccurate post-Galileo drawings of Saturn "came not from poor telescopes, but from the influence of Galileo's first reports on later observers."1

As we seek for honest answers to our questions, we must guard against the temptation of settling for the easy answer, or seeing only what we expect to see.

1. Moonwhea Jeng, "A selected history of expectation bias in physics," American Journal of Physics 74 (July 2006), p. 578. Accessed 5/21/2007 by Gary Comstock at Am J Physics.