(nature of science)
The definition of scientific knowledge is that it is “accumulated by systematic study and organized by general principles”.
Many people think that scientific knowledge is absolute and cannot change, but this is not true, because science is a process for producing knowledge the process is to make careful observations of phenomena and to invent theories out of those observations.
Change in knowledge is necessary, because new observations may demand knowledge of current theories.
Most scientific knowledge is durable, even though scientists reject the thought of they are accomplishing absolute truth. but when there are new information through new technology the knowledge might change. They rather modified ideas than reject them. For example, in formulating the theory of relativity, Albert Einstein did not renounce the laws of Newton of motion but showed them to be only an idea of limited use within a more general concept.
Nowadays we have more powerful data analysis techniques and better equipment for observations and experiments, so we have now much greater intelligence of scientific knowledge.
Medicine changed always over the years. If scientific knowledge would never change, we would not know how to heal many disease and would not even know the existence from many disease.
Or how you entail something to your children, first Mendel found out how genetics works with help from peas. He established the Mendelian laws.
Today people think that the population back in the medieval times thought that the earth is flat, but 2000 years before Columbus Ancient Greek mathematicians had already proven that the Earth was round.
In the medieval times the people did not that the disease is linked with the bad hygiene circumstances back then. Because of lacking hygiene disease spread out very fast. They had no canalization and many rats. They used water from fonts or springs, which could have been easy polluted. Disease were viewed as punishment of god till someone, who is not famous, found out that the people, who did not drink the water nearby the “canalization” were not sick and the people, who did were sick. They built the fonts farther away from the canalization. If this would not have changed we would still believe that diseases are punishments from god.
Continuity and stability are as characteristic of science as change is. It is necessary that scientific knowledge changes, otherwise we would not have new techniques, technology and knowledge and scientists are only humans as well they can also be wrong as “normal” human. So no scientific knowledge is not absolute it can be changed or modified.
http://www.livescience.com/16468-christopher-columbus-myths-flat-earth-discovered-americas.html http://www.project2061.org/publications/rsl/online/SFAA/CHAP1.HTM#ideas http://anthro.palomar.edu/mendel/mendel_1.htm http://www.deutschland-im-mittelalter.de/krankheiten.php
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
Science has evolved over the years. New machines have been invented over the past years which make it easier for scientist and their experiments. John M. Barry author of The Great Influenza specifically targets scientist and their research. He argues that a good scientist knows that there may be doubts, or that their assumptions may be proven wrong but they don’t stop trying.…
- 202 Words
- 1 Page
Satisfactory Essays -
When we talk about science, many people hear the term “theory”. The definition of a scientific theory can become confusing since many people interpret the meaning differently. When a person uses the term “theory” in a sentence it is usually used in a non-scientific way. They assume that a theory is something assumed, but not proven. When the term “theory” is used in science, it means an explanation based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning. It has been tested and confirmed as a general principle to explain phenomena. A scientific theory must be based on careful examination of facts. “A theory is a hypothesis or set of hypotheses that has stood the test and (so far, at least) has not been contradicted by evidence” (Suplee 9).…
- 2100 Words
- 9 Pages
Good Essays -
Knowledge is what we know to be true, what we understand as fact about a subject. "We can obtain authentic knowledge in any one of three ways: personal experience, observation, and report from others" (Ruggiero, 2019, p. 30).…
- 536 Words
- 3 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
Science as a way of knowing provides for objective means to build a body of knowledge…
- 2446 Words
- 10 Pages
Powerful Essays -
Firstly, research results can be complicated and generally confusing to a nonscientist, therefore the public must convey large amounts of trust in scientists. This aids contrarians in creating a credible counterargument and splitting the scientific consensus (Task #1). Most people have no scientific baseline from which to make informed opinions so they gather information from “experts” from both sides of a scientific story. Secondly, science in general is an objective project, scientists stress that their results are always falsifiable and that continued research is necessary to strengthen a scientific finding. For example, Roger Revelle started a talk to the AAAS about climate change by saying, “There is a good but by no means certain chance that the world’s average climate will become significantly warmer during the next century” (191). Contrarians used this ambiguous statement as a way to show that scientists are unsure of their work, when in fact there is no “certain chance” in any scientific trend. In order to remain trustworthy, scientists must always instill a sense of impartiality that is misconstrued as…
- 1035 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
made by nonscientists, particularly politicians. • Science is a fundamental way to understand the world around us, revealing knowledge systematically that is not accessible by other means.…
- 1884 Words
- 8 Pages
Powerful Essays -
The scientific method has evolved, over many centuries, to ensure that scientists make meaningful discoveries, founded upon logic and reason rather than emotion.…
- 615 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
Any piece of renowned fine art undergoes critical scrutiny for years in order for it to bc considered a true work of art. Scientific theories are no different. As scientists discover more about how the earth, humans, animals, and celestial objects interact, theories arise and contradict to prior beliefs. Galileo bumped heads with the Church when he proposed and supported the notion that the earth rotated around the sun. Doctors tried to reason with mothers that believed taking vaccines would give their children autism.…
- 446 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
As Watson stated in "The Value of Theories", a scientific theory is a systematic explanation that unifies various observed phenomena and facts. Based on observations we make, science operates under theories which are constantly revised and checked by experiment. A scientific theory also possesses many vital qualities for true understanding.…
- 643 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
As a child, one is constantly taught that a fact is simply an idea that can be proven. Albeit, in the scientific world, a fact connotes some form of evidence is needed, it is frequently used to describe a widely accepted notion about how the world works. According to the NCSE, a scientific fact is, “An observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as “true”” (para 2). These facts must be an observable function of the world, however, truth is subjective. What one society holds to be true does not always coincide with the truths held by a different society.…
- 831 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
Navigators and map-makers alike believed that in order to travel from their location – the Eastern Hemisphere, to the Western Hemisphere one should sail east. However, Christopher Columbus’ 1492 accidental voyage disproved this belief since he travelled due west into the Western Hemisphere. Upon his return to Spain, map-makers and navigators alike realized the importance of this discovery. It not only meant that sailors could travel due west into the Western Hemisphere and beyond into the Eastern Hemisphere, but that the earth was round or spherical. As a result of this discovery, geography – the science of the physical nature of the Earth, experienced modification. Modification or change is not always readily accepted in any theory since it implies that other ostensibly sound theories could change. However, no social or scientific theory may endure…
- 1783 Words
- 8 Pages
Better Essays -
While people have found over time that some methods are more successful than others, these methods do not work in all circumstances. As such, science and other processes of gaining knowledge change over time. Though this argument is “far from suggesting that it is simply a mystery how the natural sciences can have made many true discoveries, this approach suggests a plausible account of how they have gradually managed to refine, amplify, and extend unaided human cognitive powers” (Haack, p. 17-18). For instance, methods that were most effective in research before the age of technology are not necessarily the same methods that are the most effective now. As a result, the way in which research is conducted needs to be adaptable over time.…
- 1218 Words
- 5 Pages
Better Essays -
that it is more than just chapters in a book. Science is a process that uses evidence to understand the…
- 2075 Words
- 9 Pages
Good Essays -
Kuhn rejected this “development-by-accumulation” of accepted facts and theories. He suggested that discovering “anomalies” during scientific revolutions force us to change entire scientific…
- 934 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn argues that empirical science does not involve forming reliable beliefs. Instead, empirical science involves forming scientific beliefs simply because they are in accordance with the current paradigm. This would mean that whenever a scientific revolution occurs, old beliefs are thrown away in order to be replaced with new ones. As a result, Kuhn suggests that one cannot have rational justification for moving from one paradigm to another. To support his argument, Kuhn uses the concept that competing paradigms are incommensurable.…
- 878 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays