Science, the Scientific Method and Their Detractors

Jump to Last Post 1-4 of 4 discussions (13 posts)
  1. profile image0
    mbuggiehposted 10 years ago

    http://s1.hubimg.com/u/8952050.jpg
    The scientific method is by simple definition:

    A "body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning...[the scientific methods is] a method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses...The chief characteristic which distinguishes the scientific method from other methods of acquiring knowledge is that scientists seek to let reality speak for itself, supporting a theory when a theory's predictions are confirmed and challenging a theory when its predictions prove false." [Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method]

    Note two very important points in this definition: (1) Science and the scientific method are open to "correcting" previous knowledge and to challenging previously held theories AND (2) Science enables "reality speak for itself" even when that reality challenges previously held theories.

    Why, then, do anti-science activists and their allies (in society and government) claim that science is unreliable as a source of knowledge of reality simply because it sometimes needs correcting?

  2. PDXBuys profile image79
    PDXBuysposted 10 years ago

    I am not sure that "anti-science activists" exist.  More often, people reject specific scientific "conclusions", not science itself.  Most people will accept a scientific explanation of, say, how a light bulb works and not attribute the generation of light to magic or a supernatural origin.  But some might reject the theories about the causes of global warming.  A complex and chaotic environment is more difficult to analyze than a simple electrical circuit.

    1. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I think what you're saying is that people accept technology and engineering (for example: the light bulb), but not science---the stuff that underwrites technologies and engineering.

      And, I agree with that, but I strongly disagree that an anti-science biases and anti-science activism is non-existent.

      Clearly, we are at a cultural point of privileging religion (mythology) while working to discredit science---no matter what the subject.

      How else can one explain 7 people seeking the Presidency of the United States raising their hands claiming to believe in Creationism and to reject evolutionary biology?

      How else can we explain a persistent litmus test among conservative voters being whether or not a candidate is a Creationist and rejects evolutionary biology?

  3. Travis Wakeman profile image68
    Travis Wakemanposted 10 years ago

    The idea that science and religion are inherently contradictory (the warring camp theory) has been discredited. There are no serious academics today who maintain that religion and scientific thought are mutually exclusive.

    The problem comes when you get logical positivism (which also has been discredited).

    1. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Science and FAITH are not contradictory, but science and religion can be and often are contradictory.

      For example: Science tells us that the earth is billions of years old and that humans evolved over time. Religion---admittedly some religions and not all, tells us that the earth is barely thousands of years old and that humans arrived on it in the forms of Adam and Eve. Such thinking cannot be reconciled.

      1. Travis Wakeman profile image68
        Travis Wakemanposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Have you ever heard of "old earth creationism?"

        I'd recommend this lecture series, lecture 2: http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/cour … x?cid=4691

        Your definition of faith is equivalent to "blind faith" right?

        Well then, provided that you use you the "lack of belief" redefinition for atheism, aren't you staying that you believe something without knowledge, but isn't that in itself blind faith?

        1. profile image0
          mbuggiehposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Not playing this game.

          Science is about facts and evidence.

          Faith is about belief. Atheism too is a function of belief.

          Belief is unrelated to science.

          End of story.

          1. Travis Wakeman profile image68
            Travis Wakemanposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            I would like to respectfully disagree if I may.

            Science is about facts and evidence. Yes.

            But the empirical method isn't the only way to know what is true about the world. We can use logic and reason as well to determine what is true.  To say that the scientific method is the only way to "know" something, or "It isn't scientifically testable, and therefore cannot be true" is called logical positivism, which died in the 1960s. See: http://press.anu.edu.au//info_systems/m … 01s02.html

            I don't agree with the definition that you use of faith. This is my understanding of the biblical concept:

            http://s1.hubimg.com/u/8952832_f248.jpg

            In the words of  Jung, "I don't believe, I know."

            And so, like I said before in conjunction with that lecture series, the warring camps thesis is dead and buried.

            You could repeat yourself and simply reassert your definitions, but that wouldn't be addressing my points in a rational manner.

            1. profile image0
              mbuggiehposted 10 years agoin reply to this

              Don't you think using a definition of faith offered in the Bible and Scriptures---documents whose earthly authors and editors were deeply invested in maintaining their worldly authority, is at the very least problematic?

              1. Travis Wakeman profile image68
                Travis Wakemanposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                "whose earthly authors and editors were deeply invested in maintaining their worldly authority."

                This seems like a vague and unsubstantiated generalization.

                Problematic in what sense? Could you please spell it out for me?

  4. profile image0
    mbuggiehposted 10 years ago

    Do some research on the Council of Nicaea (Nicea) for details and substantiation of my comments.

    1. Travis Wakeman profile image68
      Travis Wakemanposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I'm already decently versed in Church history.

      http://www.audible.com/pd/History/Churc … B00GTWYXTW

      If you don't want to substantiate your remarks this conversation is probably over.

      1. profile image0
        mbuggiehposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Whatever.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)