What is it about theories in the natural and human science that make them convincing? A theory is a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain an idea or occurrence. In the fields of natural and human science, there are many theories that have been declared by experts, in order to explain random occurrences and patterns. Any expert can publish a theory on a specific concept, but in order for that theory to be accepted by society first. This is where the convincing element of a thesis and theory should be very persuasive and eminent.
Defining “Science” In order to label a certain theory or philosophy as “scientific”, certain criteria must be met to deem it so. To call a subject a science based solely on the fact that it involves observation would be absurd, however there are those who believe in “sciences” that lie entirely on this principle of observation. In order to distinguish the difference between a pseudo-science and science, there must be specific guidelines that determine the difference between the two. The difficulty in determining whether a discipline is a science or non-science is known as the problem of demarcation, and in solving this problem of demarcation lies the framework for labeling a study a science – the criterion of demarcation, as made famous by Karl Popper. This demarcating of science is a definite way to distinguish the difference between true science and pseudo-science.
Moore’s “Proof of an External World” I believe that philosopher G.E. Moore’s “Proof of an External World” was somewhat successful in explaining there being an external world, however I have reason to believe that his proof cannot be taken for granted by using logic and physics. While there are flaws to his argument, he responds to those flaws with a rebuttal, and makes the person think if they can be certain about anything in existence. Moore’s argument can be simply put that; P1) he has a right hand and he has a left hand, P2) both of the hands are external objects in the world, C) An external world exists. Moore believes this is a legitimate argument based on his criteria for a proof.
Good arguments or good reasons with science are those that are supported by the scientific method. In the realm of science, various theories and hypotheses can be tested and supported through the scientific method. Pseudoscience refers to a theory that belongs to the domain of science; however, it is not scientifically testable. Pseudoscience is collections of ideas or theories that are made by people who claim their theories are “scientific when they are not scientific”. Pseudoscience cannot be said as a science because their theories do not come from observation and lead nowhere to further scientific problems.
Historical trends in psychological enquiry, in addition to fundamental shifts in Psychology’s subject base has led to the use of the scientific method. Ultimately, the aim of the scientific method is to test hypothesis by falsifying them. It is impossible to prove a hypothesis correct but we are able to prove a hypothesis wrong. Karl Popper saw falsifiability as a black and white definition, that if a theory is falsifiable, it is scientific, and if not, then it is unscientific. Empirical data is information that is gained through a direct observation or an experiment rather than a reasoned argument or unfounded belief.
The scientists create a a theory and then make some observations that either refute or support the theory. Enlightenment thinkers believe humans can understand the world better through science due to the human capacity of observation and reasonning. They also believed if the world could be understood it could also be changed. These thinkers believed that not to be divinely ordained or determined. They instead believe people are freewilled and responsible for their own actions.
The experimental method is a study of cause and effect. It differs from non-experimental methods in that it involves the deliberate manipulation of one variable (the independent), whilst keeping all other variables constant and specifically measuring the dependent variable. After an experiment is performed a statistical analysis of the results allows conclusion to be drawn between the relationship of the variables based on rejecting either the research hypothesis or the null hypothesis. The experimental method splits three different types, a field experiment (an experiment conducted in the natural environment), a natural or quasi experiment (when the independednt variable is natrurally occurring outside of the experiment) and finally a lab experiment. A lab experiment is different as it is in a controlled environment with control over the independent variable as well as all confounding variables, the dependent will be being measured.
Religion is a set practice of beliefs in a moral code and rituals, often including some sort of salvation or enlightenment from doing such, and a belief in certain myths. As well as practicing a certain belief, religion is often equated with a belief in God. This is true in most aspects and for most religions, but a few Eastern religions do not believe there is a God per say, but more of an energy or flow that almost "controls" the universe. Science stems from the latin root "scientiae" which meant "knowledge". Science is the practical observation and theorized belief in what can be seen, felt, heard, smelt, and tasted.
In other words, they answer the question What drives behaviour? It is important to remember that the following are theories, none of which have been conclusively shown to be valid. Nonetheless, they are helpful in providing a contextual framework for dealing with individuals Process theory is a commonly used form of scientific research study in which events or occurrences are said to be the result of certain input states leading to a certain outcome (output) state, following a set process. Another theory that attempts to explain human behavior is Content theory. Process theory holds that if an outcome is to be duplicated, so too must the process which originally created it, and that there are certain constant necessary conditions for the outcome to be reached.
Intelligence, in this case –the way that one’s mind works, is clearly inborn. Another argument supporting innate intelligence is that gender and intelligence is related (Seal, 1997). While this might be a controversial topic for some, there are many statistical facts on the matter that cannot be argued. Generally, males excel at logical reasoning and spatial relations, while females are better on tests of verbal capabilities and fine dexterity (ibid.). These particular differences either become more distinctive themselves as the person grows up, or orientate the person to enhance them in his education (ibid.).