What Is Science

Philosophy of Science 1 …………………………………………………………………………………………… ….

Philosophy of Science 1. What Is Science? The word 'science' comes from a Latin word 'scientia' and originally meant 'knowledge'. But it was used more particularly to stand for 'systematic knowledge' rather than just any kind of knowledge. From its early beginnings, science has developed into one of the greatest and most influential fields of human endeavor. Today different branches of science investigate almost everything that can be observed or detected, and science as a whole shapes the way we understand the universe, our planet, ourselves, and other living things. If you want to understand, if you want to come to a picture of what science is, what knowledge is, it could be a good start to try to become clear about the general content of the concept. Hence Science is an intellectual activity carried on by humans that is designed to discover information about the natural world in which humans live and to discover the ways in which this information can be organized into meaningful patterns. A primary aim of science is to collect facts (data). An ultimate purpose of science is to discern the order that exists between and amongst the various facts. The implicit in science's devotion to acquiring knowledge about the universe is an assumption that atoms, animals, gravity, stars, wind, microbes, etc. all exist independently of our observations of them. This essentially metaphysical view is termed realism. The opposed metaphysical position is that of idealism which in varying forms denies the existence of matter independent of mind. The two views are metaphysical because although both are consistent with our experience there appears to be no way to get outside of that experience in order to see which (if either) is true. Some of the findings of science can be very counter-intuitive. Atomic theory, for example, implies that a granite boulder which appears as heavy, hard, solid, grey, etc. is actually a combination of subatomic particles with none of these properties, moving very rapidly in an area consisting mostly of empty space. Many of humanity's preconceived

…………………………………………………………………………………………….. National University of Agricultural Sciences, NARC, Islamabad

Philosophy of Science 2 …………………………………………………………………………………………… ….

notions about the workings of the universe have been challenged by new scientific discoveries. Perhaps surprisingly, realism is not necessary to science. Instrumentalism, for example, posits that while entities, such as atoms, help explain and predict data from experiments, these entities do not necessarily exist. This approach is favored by some when it comes to committing to the ontological status of a scientific entity which may seem unobservable in principle. Philosophers sometimes distinguish between the actual reality of things within the universe, which may or may not be fully perceivable by humans, and our perception of things within the universe. Immanuel Kant coined the phrases phenomena (the universe as humans experience it) and noumena (things-in-themselves). In contrast to Kant's views (and despite wide acceptance that human perception of phenomena is not necessarily an accurate reflection of the universe as it really is), most scientists assert that it is possible to understand and accurately explain (at least somewhat if not fully) the universe using the scientific method to hone accurate scientific theories and laws. Scientists to not claim to "prove" anything in the sense that it is absolute, unquestionable proof, but with a good degree of certainty based on experiments and current observations and data. Scientists point out that while some people criticize the basic ideas of science, it is science alone that has provided information on the mysteries of the atom, the cell, the solar system, and the observable universe. It is science alone that has provided knowledge to develop tens of thousands of technological advances in medicine, engineering, communications and beyond. No other system which claims to compete with science has ever actually succeeded in actually producing useful information about the physical world in which we live. One criticism, commonly made by paranormalists, is

…………………………………………………………………………………………….. National University of Agricultural Sciences, NARC, Islamabad

Philosophy of Science 3 …………………………………………………………………………………………… ….

that scientists can be closed-minded towards new "discoveries"; although discoveries and theories such as relativity and quantum mechanics have broadly changed the way scientists view the universe. 2. Scientific Method: 2.1 What is the scientific method? The scientific method is a set of techniques used by the scientific community to investigate natural phenomena by providing an objective framework in which to make scientific inquiry and analyze the data to reach a conclusion about that inquiry. Whereas philosophy in general is concerned with the why as well as the how of things; science occupies itself with the latter question only, but in a scrupulously rigorous manner. The era of modern science is generally considered to have begun with the Renaissance, but the rudiments of the scientific approach to knowledge can be observed throughout human history. The main characteristics of scientific methods are; I. The first characteristic of the scientific method is its conventional nature which serves as a framework of the generation of objective knowledge. That is why multiple characteristics exist according to the perspective with which they are classified, studied, and even named. II. The expression scientific method is used with different meanings, and, very often, abuses it in order to justify a specific personal or social position with relative ignorance about the complexity of the concept. As its very name indicates, it represents the methodology that defines and differentiates scientific knowledge from other types of knowledge. III. The philosophy of science creates the scientific method in order to exclude all that has subjective nature and, therefore, is not capable of forming part of what is

…………………………………………………………………………………………….. National University of Agricultural Sciences, NARC, Islamabad

Philosophy of Science 4 …………………………………………………………………………………………… ….

called scientific knowledge. In the last analysis, that which is accepted by common sense itself is why it obtains general acceptance by the scientific community and society. 2.2 Inductive and deductive reasoning The deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, and hypothetic-deductive or hypothesis testing are the three scientific methods, which are referred to by the generic name of the scientific method. Both deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning can go from general to specific and vice versa, in one direction or the other. Both use logic and arrive to a conclusion. As a last resort, they always have philosophic substratum elements. Both tend to be susceptible to empirical testing. Although the deductive reasoning or deductive logic is more appropriate of the formal sciences and the inductive reasoning of the empirical sciences, nothing prevents the indiscriminate application of a scientific method, or any other method, to a particular theory In my opinion, without trying to create a controversy on this subject, the fundamental difference of the deductive method and the inductive method is that the first aims to indicate, through pure logic, the conclusion in its entirety based on a few premises. So that the veracity of the conclusions is guaranteed; that is, if the applied logic is not invalidated. It is about the axiomatic model proposed by Aristotle as the ideal scientific method. On the contrary, the inductive method creates laws based on the observation of the facts, by generalizing the observed behavior; actually, what achieves is a type of generalization without obtaining a demonstration of the aforementioned laws or set of conclusions through logic.

…………………………………………………………………………………………….. National University of Agricultural Sciences, NARC, Islamabad

Philosophy of Science 5 …………………………………………………………………………………………… ….

2.3 The scientific method has four steps

I. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena. II. Formulation of a hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation III. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations. IV. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments. 2.4 Testing hypotheses:

If the experimental tests may lead either to the confirmation of the hypothesis or to the ruling out of the hypothesis. The scientific method requires that a hypothesis be ruled out or modified if its predictions are clearly and repeatedly incompatible with experimental tests. Further, no matter how elegant a theory is, its predictions must agree with experimental results if we are to believe that it is a valid description of nature. In physics, as in every experimental science, "experiment is supreme" and experimental verification of hypothetical predictions is absolutely necessary. Experiments may test the theory directly (for example, the observation of a new particle) or may test for consequences derived from the theory using mathematics and logic (the rate of a radioactive decay process requiring the existence of the new particle). Note that the necessity of experiment also implies that a theory must be testable. Theories which cannot be tested, because, for instance, they have no observable ramifications (such as, a particle whose characteristics make it unobservable), do not qualify as scientific theories. 2.5 Common Mistakes in Applying the Scientific Method:

If the scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of the scientist's bias on the outcome of an experiment. That is, when testing a hypothesis or a theory, the scientist

…………………………………………………………………………………………….. National University of Agricultural Sciences, NARC, Islamabad

Philosophy of Science 6 …………………………………………………………………………………………… ….

may have a preference for one outcome or another, and it is important that this preference not bias the results or their interpretation. The most fundamental error is to mistake the hypothesis for an explanation of a phenomenon, without performing experimental tests. Sometimes "common sense" and "logic" tempt us into believing that no test is needed. There are numerous examples of this, dating from the Greek philosophers to the present day. Another common mistake is to ignore or rule out data which do not support the hypothesis. Ideally, the experimenter is open to the possibility that the hypothesis is correct or incorrect. Sometimes, however, a scientist may have a strong belief that the hypothesis is true (or false), or feels internal or external pressure to get a specific result. In that case, there may be a psychological tendency to find "something wrong", such as systematic effects, with data which do not support the scientist's expectations, while data which do agree with those expectations may not be checked as carefully. The lesson is that all data must be handled in the same way. 3. Scientific knowledge & Non scientific knowledge: 3.1 Scientific knowledge:

The principles and empirical processes of discovery and demonstration considered characteristic of or necessary for scientific investigation, generally involving the observation of phenomena, the formulation of a hypothesis concerning the phenomena, experimentation to demonstrate the truth or falseness of the hypothesis, and a conclusion that validates or modifies the hypothesis. Not just as consultants or providers of expertise, but as overt and committed defenders or opponents of one side or the other, as active participants in the debate. The scientific knowledge strategies or uniform rules of procedure used in some scientific research with a measure of success. Scientific methods differ in generality, precision, and the extent to which they are scientifically justified. Thus, whereas the experimental method can in principle be used in all the sciences dealing with …………………………………………………………………………………………….. National University of Agricultural Sciences, NARC, Islamabad

Philosophy of Science 7 …………………………………………………………………………………………… ….

ascertainable facts, the various methods for measuring the electron charge are specific. The search for increasing quantitative precision involves the improvement or invention of special methods of measurement, also called techniques. All scientific methods are required to be compatible with confirmed scientific theories capable of explaining how the methods work. The most general of all the methods employed in science is called the scientific method. Non-scientific knowledge:

Mon-scientific knowledge" is a way of categorizing information gathered by people and institutions that do not use the scientific method as; I. Philosophers, and perhaps economists, gain knowledge through logic and reason. II. Social scientists use their learned experience of local conditions and cultural contexts to try to interpret their observations. III. Traditional and cultural knowledge is gained over long periods by trial and error. IV. Doctors, fungi enthusiasts and birdwatchers learn from experience. V. Historians read, archaeologists dig, and lawyers gain knowledge by referring to authority and listening to witnesses. VI. Geologists and Civil Society Organizations don't carry out experiments, but observe the world as it is. VII. Mathematicians gain knowledge by constructing mathematical proofs. They all gain and hold non-scientific knowledge, much of which may not be easily verified. Other kinds of knowledge, such as how to mix paints to get a particular colour, or how to ride a bike, or write a best-seller, or change a light bulb, are also nonscientific, but are not normally considered as "non scientific knowledge 4. Demarcation: Demarcation is the act of creating a boundary around a place or thing. The demarcation problem in the philosophy of science is about how and where to draw the lines around science. The boundaries are commonly drawn between science and non-science, between …………………………………………………………………………………………….. National University of Agricultural Sciences, NARC, Islamabad

Philosophy of Science 8 …………………………………………………………………………………………… …. science and pseudoscience, and between science and religion. A form of this problem, known as the generalized problem of demarcation subsumes all three cases. The generalized problem looks for criteria for deciding which of two theories is the more scientific. The Scientific Method is touted as one way of determining which disciplines are scientific and which are not. Those which follow the scientific method might be considered sciences; those that do not are not. That is, method might be used as the criterion of demarcation between science and non-science. If it is not possible to articulate a definitive method, then it may also not be possible to articulate a definitive distinction between science and non-science, between science and pseudo-science, and between scientists and non-scientists. Feyerabend denies there is a scientific method, and in his book Against Method argues that scientific progress is not the result of the application of any particular method. In essence, he says that anything goes Demarcation may also refer to: I. Demarcation line, a temporary border between the countries II. Demarcation problem, the question of what theories or beliefs lie within the boundaries of science III.

Demarcation dispute, may arise when two different trade unions both claim the right to represent the same class or group of workers

IV.

Demarcation point, in telephony, the point at which the telephone company network ends and connects with the wiring at the customer premises

5. Conclusion: The aims of my discussion about science philosophy; to despite popular impressions of science, it is not the goal of science to answer all questions, only those that pertain to physical reality (measurable empirical experience). Science does not and can not produce absolute and unquestionable truth. Rather, science consistently tests the currently best hypothesis about some aspect of the physical world, and when necessary revises or replaces it in light of new observations or data. So, that is why science is not a source of subjective value judgments, though it can certainly speak to matters of ethics and public …………………………………………………………………………………………….. National University of Agricultural Sciences, NARC, Islamabad

Philosophy of Science 9 …………………………………………………………………………………………… …. policy by pointing to the likely consequences of actions. However, science can't tell us which of those consequences to desire or which is 'best'.

6. References: I. Barrow, John. Theories of Everything (Oxford Univ. Press, 1991) II. Brody, Baruch A., and Grandy, Richard E., Readings in the Philosophy of Science, 2nd edition, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1989. III. Kate; Sergei, Vitaly (2000). "Evolution and Philosophy: Science and Philosophy". Think Quest. http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/ph1.shtml. Retrieved on 19 January 2009. IV. Kuhn, Thomas.The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Univ. of Chicago Press, 1962). V. Wilson, E. Bright.An Introduction to Scientific Research (McGraw-Hill, 1952). ***********************************************************

…………………………………………………………………………………………….. National University of Agricultural Sciences, NARC, Islamabad