Compare And Contrast Darwin And The Scientific Method

Darwin and The Scientific Method In the opening of the article, Charles Darwin claimed that he conducted his research based on inductive principles. He stated that he had used induction to develop an universal claim by accumulating unbiased observations on a particular subject. However, after an investigation of Darwin’s notebooks and his correspondence, Ayala realized that Darwin’s methodology of his research was different from what Darwin publicized to the audience. Ayala exposed this contradiction by comparing inductive and hypothetico-deductive methods, and relating them to Darwin’s methods.
Darwin was undeniably a scientist that opened the realm of natural laws with his theory of natural selection and advanced hypothesis in multiple scientific fields. Modern science studies often intertwined his theory and accomplishments. However, Ayala questioned Darwin’s method because the time between what he was researching, and when he published his hypothesis was suspicious. Ayala believed that Darwin claim as an inductionist because he wanted his findings appear unbiased. Moreover, his claim was also supported by Darwin’s letter written to a scientist, whom was told to use theory to guide his observations after earning respect from other scientists. These evidences convinced Ayala to claim that Darwin supported the hypothetico-deductive method, rather
Then, an universal conclusion is made based on an accumulation of unbiased findings. Inductive reasoning is powerful because of how unbiased the work conducted is. However, Ayala claims that it is impossible for a scientist to observe a phenomenon without a preconception, and that the inductive method fails to account for a universal truth despite of an accumulation of observations. For example, we can make an observation of trees with leaves and conclude that all trees have leaves. However, we