The Principles of Scientific Thinking - Essay Example

The principles of scientific thinking The Principles of Scientific Thinking Introduction Scientific thinking constitutes the process of extending knowledge by forming theoretical foundations based in epidemiological patterns. These patterns of knowledge are then tested for logic to investigate validity in their propositions. Critical thinking involves thinking for oneself to arrive successfully at reliable solutions to problems and answers to problems (Lilienfeld, 2010). Scientific and creative thinkers must comprehend the principles of scientific thinking to equip them with proper skepticism for questioning knowledge, facts, and opinions. Ruling out rival hypotheses Most of the information that is spread around is characterized by multiple explanations. Scientific thinkers have the responsibility of investigating whether they have excluded all other possible reasonable explanations in the propositions before they discard them. Scientific thinking and critical thinking provide rational backgrounds for finding truths to various questions without being misled. This implies that every claim should have only one explanation. For example, HIV/AIDS has been described several origins such as wild chimpanzee, laboratory product and bushy mangabeys and bush meat practice (Crawford, 2013). The role of scientists is to investigate the truth behind each claim and accept the only claim that is supported by facts. Correlation is not causation The principle of scientific thinking implies that when two things are related, it does not necessarily mean that one can cause another (Lilienfeld, 2010). This principle helps scientific thinkers to discard the fallacy of correlation-causation. Correlation-causation fallacy implies making conclusions that two correlated variables must have a casual relationship. The principle also exposes thinkers to the third variable, which is referred to as the common-causal variable. The third variable causes both variables. An example of correlation is not causation principle is the belief that when children sleep with lights on, they are likely to develop myopia; therefore, if children sleep with lights on they develop myopia (Chapell, 2001). Therefore, scientific thinkers should know that correlation between two variables does not necessarily imply causal connections between them. Falsifiabilty Falsifiabilty principle means that all theories and propositions must have room for being proven wrong if there is valid evidence against them (Lilienfeld, 2010). Hypotheses are subjected to studies planned to test them on the foundations that they will either be accepted or rejected. The fundamental element of falsifiabilty is that theories that explain or account for all conceivable outcomes of an occurrence do not explain anything. In some cases, sports fans make predictions about the outcomes of various matches. Sometimes, however, the outcomes of the game do not rhyme with their predictions. According to Lilienfeld (2010), these predictions must have room for being disproved when the actual outcomes are inconsistent with conceivable body of observable evidence; claims that are devoid of the element of falsifiabilty cannot be tested for truthfulness. Replicabiltiy Replicability refers to the possibility of testing or replicating claims. Replicability should produce the same results if the experiment is repeated using the exact procedure. When researchers adhere to the exact procedures of carrying out research, they mostly get different answers; this implies that the original study was not characterized by replicability (Lilienfeld, 2010). Scientific thinkers are encouraged to replicate the findings of other researchers since it increases the confidence of the users in the articles these researchers produce. For example, Gina (2010) reports that in 2009, a group of researchers from Colombia found out that the risk of people to osteoporosis is directly proportional the levels of serotonin. According to the research, people with more serotonin have weaker bones. Replica research has also concluded that the people with the highest level of serotonin in their blood tend to have the lowest bone density. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence According to this principle, the amount of evidence required to convince people concerning a particular claim is contingent upon the nature of the claim. Claims that widely contradict people’s knowledge require more persuasive evidence before people can accept them. Evaluation of psychological propositions requires thinkers to should investigate the extent to which the claims contradict the evidence they already know. Excessive contradictions will require inquiring the evidence provided to find out whether it is extra-ordinary. For example, the existence of shamans has been a controversial subject for a long time (Kallen, 2004). The possibility of people’s souls exploring the upper and under worlds to link the sprits and the living needs extraordinary evidence for people to believe in those claims. Occam’s razor The fundamental element in Occam’s razor principle is that some claims are characterized by complexity in their explanations instead of maintaining desirable levels of simplicity. The principle encourages readers to study explanations for both claims, select a simple, and discard unnecessarily complex explanations. For example, there exist different explanations of where people go after death (McAnally, 2009). Some people believe that the soul goes to heaven and the old body is left to rot under the surface. However, people fail to define the exact nature and time to go to heaven. Biologists believe that when people die, their history ends at death just like other living things; this is a simpler explanation of where people go after death than the heaven concept. Conclusion Both scientific thinking and critical thinking are critical to the lives of human beings. The six principles of scientific thinking are worth knowing since they equip psychologists with skepticism abilities for questioning facts, theories, and propositions. Scientific thinkers should subject claims to intensive tests and evaluate them against the principles of thinking to ensure that they have the elements of validity and truthfulness. References Chapell, M. (2001). Myopia and night-time lighting during sleep in children and adults. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 92(3), 640-642. Crawford, D. H. (2013). Virus hunt: The search for the origin of HIV. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kallen, S. A. (2004). Shamans. San Diego, Calif: Lucent Books. Kolata, Gina (2011). 2 studies in conflict on Growth of Bone. The new York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/24/health/research/24bone.html?_r=0 Lilienfeld, S. O. (2010). Psychology: A framework for everyday thinking. Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. McAnally, B. (2009). Life after death & heaven and hell. New York: Guideposts. Read More