“Doubt Is the Key to Knowledge” (Persian Proverb). to What Extent Is This True in Two Areas of Knowledge?
“Doubt is the key to knowledge” (Persian Proverb). To what extent is this true in two areas of knowledge?
As a Persian proverb once said to have progress in knowledge it is necessary to doubt. In other words, when we begin to doubt what we believed was true, we move forward to better knowledge making a further step to Absolute Truth. To what extent is doubt involved into the process of gaining knowledge? What is the function of doubt? To what extent is doubt either an engine or a brake to the progress in different areas of knowledge? To reveal the different facets of this issue I explored it by examining Natural Science and History.
Natural Science.
We found that the theory did not fit the facts, and we were delighted because this is how science advances. O.R.Frisch.[1]
Doubt is an essential part of Natural Science, its basis. If we pay attention to the algorithm of gaining knowledge, scientific method, doubt starts working from the very beginning – in observation. A scientist might notice those phenomena that don’t fit any known explanations, so s/he starts to doubt: why is it so? Then doubt accompanies all other steps in the scientific method because almost in every theory in Natural Science it’s possible to find limitations and exceptions, i.e. all theories are potentially falsifiable. In the past, theories were changed, sometimes these changes were dramatic, i.e. it might be that contemporary scientific knowledge will be changed in time, even fundamentally.
No scientists argue that Newton’s Mechanical laws work but their scope is limited by the mass of the object. In space, Newton’s laws are useless and Einstein’s theory of relativity begins working, which combines at the same time Newton’s and Maxwell’s Mechanical laws. An attentive reader might ask: if Newton’s laws combined with Maxwell’s ones work well in space why don’t they work separately? Does it mean that either Newton’s or Maxwell’s Mechanical laws are wrong? No, they simply explain almost
As a Persian proverb once said to have progress in knowledge it is necessary to doubt. In other words, when we begin to doubt what we believed was true, we move forward to better knowledge making a further step to Absolute Truth. To what extent is doubt involved into the process of gaining knowledge? What is the function of doubt? To what extent is doubt either an engine or a brake to the progress in different areas of knowledge? To reveal the different facets of this issue I explored it by examining Natural Science and History.
Natural Science.
We found that the theory did not fit the facts, and we were delighted because this is how science advances. O.R.Frisch.[1]
Doubt is an essential part of Natural Science, its basis. If we pay attention to the algorithm of gaining knowledge, scientific method, doubt starts working from the very beginning – in observation. A scientist might notice those phenomena that don’t fit any known explanations, so s/he starts to doubt: why is it so? Then doubt accompanies all other steps in the scientific method because almost in every theory in Natural Science it’s possible to find limitations and exceptions, i.e. all theories are potentially falsifiable. In the past, theories were changed, sometimes these changes were dramatic, i.e. it might be that contemporary scientific knowledge will be changed in time, even fundamentally.
No scientists argue that Newton’s Mechanical laws work but their scope is limited by the mass of the object. In space, Newton’s laws are useless and Einstein’s theory of relativity begins working, which combines at the same time Newton’s and Maxwell’s Mechanical laws. An attentive reader might ask: if Newton’s laws combined with Maxwell’s ones work well in space why don’t they work separately? Does it mean that either Newton’s or Maxwell’s Mechanical laws are wrong? No, they simply explain almost