Scientific Knowledge Issues - Human vs Natural Sciences - Assignment Example

What separates science from all other human activities is its belief in the provisional nature of all conclusions Introduction Philosophy is the origin of every sort of knowledge. All the subjects like science, mathematics, literature etc originated from philosophy. In other words, without a philosophical background no knowledge can exist or survive for a longer period. Scientific knowledge is accepted as the genuine and logical knowledge at present because of its measurability or accountability. Scientific knowledge always formulates various hypothesizes regarding each problem. These hypothesizes are analyzed based on experimental evidences. Those hypotheses which are getting the backing of experimental evidences have been accepted as principles or facts. For example, earlier science has formulated theories about the shape of earth. Various hypothesizes were formulated with respect to the shape of earth like, flat, elliptical, spherical etc. But at present based on the evidences it has been proved that earth has the shape of an oblate spheroid. Science never believes in absolute conclusions. It believes that nothing is absolute and everything is relative. Even the proven scientific principles are undergoing changes at present. For example, earlier science believed that electricity is flowing from the anode to the cathode or from the positive pole to the negative pole. But later science has realized that electricity is nothing but the flow of electrons and it can never flow from anode to cathode; but it can only flow from cathode to anode. What separates science from all other human activities is its belief in the provisional nature of all conclusions. Human Science and natural science “One of the main differences between the Natural and Human Sciences is the object of study: while the Natural Sciences observe and experiment on the world of nature, the Human Sciences focus more on human behavior. Humans are, arguably, less predictable and stable than the natural world, so the conclusions about our behavior should be more provisional than the conclusions reached” (Theory of Knowledge). Human being is the wisest entity on earth which helped him to work for improvement always. The brain of human being is a complex thing which always looks for improvement in every area of life. On the other hand the rest of living things and the non living things are more or less remains the same. For example, a lion lives in cave at present. It has used cave as its home in the past and in future also. Nobody expect that a lion would construct a house like the one of a human at any time. On the other hand, we know the differences of a human house in the past, and present. In other words, the knowledge about the nonliving things and other living things might be close to perfection whereas same thing cannot be said about the human. Natural and human sciences are different in their ways of concluding certain things. Human science relies heavily on the sensory perceptions to arrive at conclusions whereas natural science looks for experimental evidences for generalizations. Human sciences like economics or sociology look for data from the previous history or surrounding world to generalize things. For example, the economic term monopoly is not considered as a good market condition. Economists arrive at those conclusions based on their assumptions that monopolistic firms may exploit the consumers because of the lack of competition. On the other hand, natural science cannot arrive at conclusions based on such assumptions. To be more precise, natural science uses induction and deduction method for making conclusions. “A commonly held idea of the distinction between these logical paths to knowledge is that induction is the formation of a generalization derived from examination of a set of particulars, while deduction is the identification of an unknown particular, drawn from its resemblance to a set of known facts” (INDUCTION, DEDUCTION, AND THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD). For example we have seen that many zebras with black and white stripes on their body. From the above observation we can induce that all zebras have black and white stripe on their body. On the other hand, suppose Neil Armstrong had found some human foot prints on the soil of moon. In this case he can deduce that humans are available on moon also. Knowledge Issues The question of are scientific conclusions purely rational is a highly controversial one as science forced to change many of its theories in the recent past as mentioned earlier. For example, earlier science believed that molecule was the smallest possible entity of a matter. But later science postulated that atoms, not the molecules, are the smallest possible entity of a matter. Later again science proved that even atom is divisible into its components like electrons, protons and neutrons. Moreover, science earlier believed that the sun was rotating around the earth and the earth was stable. Later, science argued that sun is remaining stationary while the earth was moving. But at present science is telling that not only the earth, the sun is also rotating. Who knows what the science is going to tell in future about the movement of earth and sun. In other words, scientific conclusions or theories are provisional. Today’s scientific theories might be rubbishes tomorrow. Mathematics is the base of scientific knowledge. “Mathematics turns out to provide a useful (usually even essential) tool for expressing scientific concepts. Some even draw theological conclusions about a universe being designed so well in tune with mathematics” (Harvey). All the scientific calculations are based on mathematical theories. For example, the time required for the earth to rotate around the sun and its own axis is concluded based on the mathematical theories. It is difficult for science to give an objective view about the world because of the complexities associated with the world. For example moon is under the control of earth and earth is under the control of sun and who controls the sun?. No scientific theories so far able to answer the above question. In other words, there is lot of questions which has to be answered clearly before we can say something objectively about the world. All knowledge are provisional and provisional conclusions are subjective. For example, at the time of writing this paper, large hadron collider experiment is going on in order to find out a basic particle called Higg’s boson. “The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is a gigantic scientific instrument near Geneva, where it spans the border between Switzerland and France about 100 m underground. It is a particle accelerator used by physicists to study the smallest known particles – the fundamental building blocks of all things. It will revolutionize our understanding, from the minuscule world deep within atoms to the vastness of the Universe” (The Large Hadron Collider). Scientists believe that this experiment may help them in explaining the secret of life on earth. In other words, science is not sure about it the success of that experiment. Even if science was able to find out the secret particle who knows whether it will explain the secret of life or not?. So, scientific assumptions are subjective to many parameters. Knowledge helps us to tolerate differences of opinion/conclusions. For example, terrorism is one of the curses of the current century. Most of the people engage in terrorism due to poverty and religious fundamentalism. The knowledge about the above fact can help the authorities to counter the terrorists in a different manner compared to criminals. Thus knowledge helps us to segregate between the reasons of criminal activities and terrorist activities. So far we have discussed about the provisional nature of scientific knowledge. But we should remember that even though scientific knowledge is provisional, we have no other sources for an absolute knowledge. In other words science has no answers to the questions like from where we come and where we go after death. Such questions are addressed by religions. Only religions are capable of answering such questions even though no scientific backings are there. In other words, till science unveils the miseries of birth and death, religious beliefs and claims have value in this world. Scientific knowledge is not a complete or perfect one. It has its own limitations even though it is useful to us in many ways. Conclusions Science never says anything in absolute terms. Science always believes in the provisional nature of knowledge. Human being is an entity in earth which is capable of rational thinking. No other entity has the capacity of rational thinking like the human being in the world. Rational thinking helps the human being to polish their knowledge always and hence the knowledge is undergoing constant changes as far as human being is concerned. Science uses induction-deduction method for arriving at conclusions. Mathematics helps science to deduce conclusions. Our world is a complex entity which is associated with many other things and hence scientific knowledge is always subjective rather than objective. Scientific knowledge has its limitations. So far science has failed to give a comprehensive idea about the origin of universe or earth. It relies on certain assumptions for explaining the evolution of earth. On the other hand, religions have certain explanations about the origin of universe and the history of human on earth. Till science unveils the secret of life, we cannot completely rule out the arguments of religions. Works Cited 1. Harvey, Allan. 2000. “What is the direct relationship between math and science?”. 02 December 2009. 2. “INDUCTION, DEDUCTION, AND THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD”. 02 December 2009. 3. “The Large Hadron Collider”. 02 December 2009. 4. “Theory of Knowledge”. 02 December 2009. Read More