Preview

My Thoughts About Science

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
329 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
My Thoughts About Science
My Thoughts About Science Name______Krystalina Truong___________

After reading “Thoughts About Science” by Robert Sager, write a one-half to one page (no longer) reflective essay on your thoughts about science and environmental science.

Reading “Thoughts About Science” intrigued my research towards what science really is. Whether or not someone may believe that the earth started out with a great boom, the amount of research we have today about why we can survive living on this planet explains other theories. The scientific method shows how we can take thoughts and turn them into facts with a reasonable way of doing so. I think the scientific method is great to use as humans because it involves tons of research and not just a thought we claim is true. Questioning our mind and putting it into actions such as testing if the thought may be true or not shows we can explain our reason here on earth. Although there are many other contradictions, such as religious and cultural beliefs, I think as humans we have to accept scientific facts in our lives because it makes up our development of humankind. Without science, we could be living in a world where all humans die because we don’t know how to survive in terms of what to do if we get a fever, what to do to nourish our bodies and so forth. Science, in my opinion, is all about testing hypothesis so that we can better ourselves. Some scientists may go back to a hypothesis or theory that was proven a long time ago, yet touch back on it to see if we can improve a certain formula / truth. I think science helps our environment because the environment has so many factors that we need in order to survive (animals, plants, heat, etc). Knowing that we need these through the help of science will better ourselves even if we go through negative times where a thought may not be able to be proven.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    19th Century Dbq

    • 1376 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Adam Smith said it best when he stated “Science is the great antidote to the poison of superstition.” People of the…

    • 1376 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Science has had a huge impact on society in the past few centuries with medicines curing disastrous diseases and the growing success of technology. This success has led to a widespread belief in science; believing science can deliver well to the people in society. However, this success has been dimmed by science causing problems; for example global warming and pollution as these are both products of science. However the good and bad effects of science show features distinguishing it from other belief systems as it enables us to explain predict and control the world in a way that non-scientific or pre scientific belief systems cannot do. Science is a belief system as it fills the gaps which ideology and religion cannot fill and science also makes sense of the world around us. An example of this is science explains why earth is the perfect environment for humans to live on. However, Rationalists point out that science is based on fact, whereas beliefs are not: they rely on faith. Therefore, Rationalists argue that science is not a belief system. Dawkins put forward that science is based on evidence so science cannot be a belief system. Whereas some people use science to explain the world but we need to have faith in science, an example of this can be in regards to cures for cancer. Therefore people have faith in system and would claim science is a…

    • 1003 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Research Paper On Zelia

    • 573 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Science pushes people to leave their comfort zone and challenge themselves. It makes them do things they would never imagine themselves doing. People risk so much when it comes to technology. Never knowing the outcome until after it’s already happening.…

    • 573 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Science is a fact. We see and use it everyday. We tend to not give our mothers enough credit, but when they cook you your dinner that you digest the food gets broken down by acids and then either stored or made into energy. Even when your pen touches a piece of paper and leaves it residue you are partaking in science. We tend to not consider our daily routines as such a frequently talked about phenomenon, but its true.…

    • 508 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    a) I definately agree with this statement and how science is ever changing. The scientific method begins by asking a question about something. After asking a question the next step is to form a hypothesis or educated guess. A repeatable expieriment is then created to test said hypothesis, and a large amount of data is collected. Data collection then leads Scientits to analyze the data and come up with a conclusion to see if the hypothesis was proven correct or incoreect. If the hypothesis is proven in correct more tests and questions must then be asked. Science is great in the fact that it is not concrete and changes when new information is gathered. Instead of condeming new thoughts that could oppose a theory Science accepts these oppositions and builds off of past failures. Failure is not a sign of defeat in the eyes of Sciecne but rather a victory because we now know something is false and are on the right track to discovering something we couldn't explain.…

    • 1018 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    I agree mostly with the positivists. Because to me as an individual, science has helped me a great load. For example, I love to exercise. After exercising, it is common to get some minor injuries. Bruises, sore tendons/muscles etc. but science has helped me…

    • 504 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    “Science contributes moral as well as material blessings to the world. Its great moral contribution is objective, or the scientific point of view. The means doubting everything except facts; it means hewing to the facts, lets the chips fall where they may.” (163)…

    • 506 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Many people think that science should replace religion because religion is a left over from the infancy of our intelligence and religion makes humans to not be able to think critically because they do not want to believe the facts that science could explain everything and that God does not exist. What science could not do before, for example, people like Aristotle and other ancient Greek scholars believed that the Earth was round till Isaac Newton first proposed that Earth was not perfectly round, based on some research that have proven Newton’s claim, such as because of the Earth being sphere, the distance from Earth’s center to sea level is roughly 13 miles greater at the equator than at the poles. Hence science, knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe, should work together with religion, a set of beliefs that is held by a group of people, because both can complete each other’s flaws.…

    • 933 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Science is extremely useful in the world today and is very interesting. I am really good at it. Science constantly grows and become more engaging. It is used…

    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Philosophy of Science

    • 1133 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Umbrellaology stumbles upon the ago old question of what makes something a “science”? To the writer of Umbrellaology, it is a scientific theory, which can be empirically confirmed by gathered evidence, to better understand the study of umbrellas. However, agreeing with Umbrellaology in my opinion would be doing a great disservice to the jurisdictions of a true “science” from a pseudoscience. Using my personal views, objective data, and support from such philosophers as Ziman and Popper, I will prove that Umbrellaology is not a genuine science!…

    • 1133 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Current Views in Science

    • 6055 Words
    • 25 Pages

    Although isolated virus particles are just assemblages of chemicals, they consists of chemical substances of a very special kind - the proteins and nucleic acids that are the essential constituents of living matter. In viruses these substances can be studied in isolation, and it was such studies that led molecular biologists to some of their greatest discoveries in the 1950s and 1960s. Nucleic acids are chainlike macro-molecules that carry information for self-replication and protein synthesis. When a virus enters a living cell it is able to use the cell's biochemical machinery to build new virus particles according to the instructions encoded in its DNA or RNA. A virus, therefore, is not an ordinary parasite which takes nourishment from its host to live and reproduce itself. Being essentially a chemical message, it does not provide its own metabolism, nor can it perform many other functions characteristic of living organisms. Its only function is to take over the cell's replication machinery and use it to replicate new virus particles. This activity takes place at a frantic rate. Within an hour an infected cell can produce thousands of new viruses and in many cases the cell will be destroyed in the process. Since so many virus particles are produced by a single cell, a virus infection of a multicelled organism can rapidly destroy a great number of cells and thus lead to disease. Although the structure and functioning of viruses is now well known, their basic nature still remains intriguing. Outside living cells a virus particle cannot be called a living organism; inside a cell it forms a living system together with the cell, but one of a very spcial kind. It is self-organising, but the purpose of its organization is not the stability and survival of the entire virus-cell system. Its only aim is the production of new viruses that will then go on to form living systems of this peculiar kind in the environments provided by other cells.…

    • 6055 Words
    • 25 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Science is based on facts, not opinions or preferences. According to The Nature of Science, it is “a determination of what is most likely to be correct at the current time with the evidence at our disposal.” It aims for measurable results through testing and analysis. It views knowledge as a systematic enterprise that has the ability to build and organize knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. It also refers to a body of knowledge that is able to be rationally explained and reliably…

    • 1019 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Science and Religion

    • 476 Words
    • 2 Pages

    When applying scientific approach, one assumes that various processes and events we observe take place due to natural causes instead of some divine forces. Moreover, science is precise, and the matters of morality, spirituality, and holiness lie beyond its areas of interest. Also, often describes any systematic field of study or the knowledge gained from it. We have been using science to help us find unsolved clues or used it in solved clues such as dinosaur bones, mammoths, mummies, for weather explanations, earthquakes, etc. The use of science removed gods. Before science was brought to the world, there were many gods, mostly for mother nature such as, rain, sun, wind, and so on. Furthermore, we no longer turn to god for rain because science has answered that. We only turn to god for questions science can’t answer such as, when will we die, where will we go? Although there is proof that we go somewhere after death.…

    • 476 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Philosophy of Science

    • 405 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The philosophy of science is concerned with the assumptions, foundations, methods, implications of science, and with the use and merit of science. This discipline sometimes overlaps metaphysics, ontology and epistemology. Philosophy of science has historically been met with mixed response from the scientific community. Though scientists often contribute to the field, many prominent scientists have felt that the practical effect on their work is limited (Babich, 1994). A paradigm is a world view, a way of ordering and simplifying the perceptual world's stunning complexity by making certain fundamental assumptions about the nature of the universe, of the individual, and of society. Paradigms are normative; they determine what the practitioner views as important and unimportant, reasonable and unreasonable, legitimate and illegitimate, possible and impossible, and what to attend to and what to ignore (Ratcliffe, 1983). Epistemology is “the study of the nature of knowledge and justification” (Schwandt, 2001, p. 71), and epistemological issues are “issues about an adequate theory of knowledge or justificatory strategy” (Harding, 1987). Epistemology is theory of knowledge. Some philosophers are specialist epistemologists who study the components, sources, and limits of knowledge and of the justification of knowledge (Moser, 2002). Blaikie (1993) describes the root definition of ontology as “the science or study of being’ and develops this description for the social sciences to encompass ‘claims about what exists, what it looks like, what units make it up and how these units interact with each other”. In short, ontology describes our view (whether claims or assumptions) on the nature of reality, and specifically, is this an objective reality that really exists, or only a subjective reality, created in our minds.…

    • 405 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Philosophy of Science

    • 1495 Words
    • 6 Pages

    This essay will contain a comparison of the two philosophers Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn and their respective scientific theories. It is relevant because they both focused on the same problems and tried to find an explanation. They each had their own unique ideas and strived to answer the same questions, but their theories often clashed, leading to great discussion. Even with different views, their work has a great number of similarities and they often looked to one another in order to develop their own positions. The core of the debate between Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn is scientific progress and the evolution of science. In order to analyze this subject it is necessary to look into terms such as falsification, critical rationalism and paradigm relativism.…

    • 1495 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays