Oztinato profile image 81

Is the scienctific method infallible?


Like many ancient religions modern scientists regard their methods to be infallible. Is this the right attitude?

 

sort by best latest

Gaurav Oberoi profile image79

Best Answer gaurav oberoi says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
  • rodrigo sebidos profile image

    Rodrigo Sebidos (rodrigo sebidos) 2 years ago

    You're right, that's the beauty of science- what is true today may be obsolete tomorrow?, Yes, because science is dynamic, not static, but the point here is what make science unscientific-Check scientific methods ?


  • See all 2 comments
Daniel Gottlob profile image80

Daniel Gottlob says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
  • Oztinato profile image

    Oztinato 2 years ago

    One of the "fallible bits" that Hawking agrees with is the Incompleteness Theorem of Kurt Godel which proves science can never answer all questions. It can only shed some light on a limited amount of infinite questions.


  • See all 3 comments
cathylynn99 profile image75

cathylynn99 says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
  • Oscarlites profile image

    Oscar Jones (Oscarlites) 2 years ago

    what about tried and tested, proven and true?

jackclee lm profile image82

Jack Lee (jackclee lm) says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
  • Oztinato profile image

    Oztinato 2 years ago

    The scientific method is "sound" but is it infallible? The general consensus here is no.


  • See all 7 comments
thegecko profile image79

Warren Samu (thegecko) says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
Larry Fields profile image79

Larry Fields says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
  • Oztinato profile image

    Oztinato 2 years ago

    We are agreeing that science is if course fallible. We now need to identify what aspects are the " fallible bits "

Oztinato profile image81

Oztinato says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
  • Larry Fields profile image

    Larry Fields 2 years ago

    Oz expressed an interest in the "fallible bits." Here's one: Black Holes. The BH hypothesis is based upon earlier work in Relativity,. However, aside from numerous BH CANDIDATES, there's little PHYSICAL evidence that these beasties actually exist.


  • See all 3 comments
Readmikenow profile image94

Readmikenow says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
rodrigo sebidos profile image82

Rodrigo Sebidos (rodrigo sebidos) says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
  • Oztinato profile image

    Oztinato 2 years ago

    Have you seen 2001:A Space Odyssey? We now have AI tech ready to apply the scientific method for us but we have leading scientists saying this will end human civilisation! So what went wrong with the scientific method?


  • See all 6 comments
Misfit Chick profile image71

Catherine Mostly (Misfit Chick) says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
  • Damian10 profile image

    Damian (Damian10) 2 years ago

    There is always going to be a distinguishable difference between scientists and religion. Here is the thing though all of the science in the Bible is true even though it is certainly not a science book. Great hub Oz!


  • See all 4 comments
mridulrai profile image79

Mridul Rai (mridulrai) says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
  • Oztinato profile image

    Oztinato 2 years ago

    So we agree that science is fallible. Religion is s different question for a different topic. This question is about science only


  • See all 6 comments
thecrookedbell profile image73

thecrookedbell says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
Generalrevs profile image58

Generalrevs says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
  • rodrigo sebidos profile image

    Rodrigo Sebidos (rodrigo sebidos) 2 years ago

    Yes, you have your point, but talking of scientific method as one comment says its a "good tool" what makes it bad is the way we use the scientific method that makes science unscientific? Check the "bits and pieces" of scientific method.

Selena Meyers profile image58

Selena Meyers says

You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.

2 years ago
 |  Comment
  • thegecko profile image

    Warren Samu (thegecko) 2 years ago

    We are a type of primate that evolved over tens of thousands of years. As for the rest, its part of the formation of life. You make it sound like scientists keep offering a new story. The core remains the same, new facets continued to be discovered.