law describes, theory explains * What is the difference between a scientific theory and a scientific hypothesis? theory is well tested, hypothesis is an educated guess * How are scientific theories, laws, and hypotheses similar? they all start with a hypothesis, kind of a step by step analysis * Why is evidence important in science? to support or refute a hypothesis * What happens if scientists discover new evidence that contradicts an accepted scientific hypothesis, theory, or law? it leads to modification of scientific
Or in other words, it is an activity that can “prove” through a test of experiments something to be true or not. Scientist use the scientific method, or forms of this method, to prove a theory to be right or wrong. If a theory proves to be wrong or cannot provide proof, then it not considered to be science. The purpose of science is to produce useful models of reality. Pseudoscience is a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.
* Interpretive: facts are settled, but argue on what theory applies and so on * Evaluative: the significance * Methodological: procedures and techniques + what will be the outcome 6. At what point in his analysis does Casper identify scientific discourse that describes "science as it is actually performed?" - he is talking about the nobel prize lectures because they talk about the start, stop, and pitfalls differently than a research report does, it’s how science is actually performed 7. As a result of his analysis of Nobel lectures what characteristics does Casper attribute to epideictic scientific discourse? - little modulation or hedging (type of statements) - value of the research and the future (stasis) - recognition of other’s help/work/achievement - discussion on the nature of science itself 8.
There is an ongoing debate on whether or not sociology is a science; science is defined as a systematic knowledge of the physical or material work gained through observation and experimentation. Natural sciences have few key aims – the principal aim is to base laws and theories on objective facts that are obtained through investigation of observable phenomena. This involves using statistical techniques to test the relationship between variables, objectivity is very important in science where research and knowledge are free from bias. Positivists believe that what goes on in reality is not random or by chance, but patterned and it is science's job to observe and record these patterns in a system to be able to explain them. Compte argues that sociology should be based on the methodology of the natural sciences and that it would result in 'invariable laws' within society.
Stacey Snyder Professor McMichael Introduction to Philosophy April 08, 2014 Paley’s Teleological Argument In this paper, I will be discussing Paley’s teleological argument for the existence of God. This is a valid argument but in my opinion it is not enough to prove the existence of God. I believe that even if all the premises are true and they relate to the conclusion, which they do, that the argument can still be proven wrong by other theories. Paley’s teleological arguments, also called the design argument, attempts to prove that God exists by proving that God created the earth and created humans. Paley’s version of the argument is commonly recognized by the “watchmaker” analogy which is as follows.
It is necessary and possible for science to deliberately exclude any * subjective/ emotional reactions * imaginative projections * valuations * expectations from our scientific dealings with reality if not avoided the resultant knowledge will be deceptive and untrustworthy what should be avoided is any form of * religious * social * political commitment of the knower attaining knowledge these are unjustified and untested prejudices which impair an impartial view of and grip on reality. these prevent objective reliable knowledge of reality. when done properly it yields knowledge of things in the world and also of the connections between these things as they really are: facts have to speak through direct perception for themselves in a neutral and unhindered way. *
True science uses all available data, makes theories, and tests them. Adjustments can be made when theories do not fit science, which is why the understanding of our universe, astronomy is science. Pseudoscience is when we use what is wanted or desired and use available resources and information to prove our conclusion, such as
The research and testing is done to either prove or disprove the hypothesis. This research is used to make a prediction and a theory as to why something happened is developed. Dr. E. Stanley Jones states “Prior to the age of science, truth was determined philosophically, by debate. But the scientific method has brought the search for truth out of the lecture hall and into the laboratory.” (Christianity.com 2013). However, the scientific method is only a way of seeking the truth.
Butterfield (1965) author of “The Origins of Modern Science” persuasively argues that what materialized in the 16th century and subsequent years was not necessarily the results of new information, but transformed minds. Helweg, (1997) explains that other cultures have made significant findings to the human race; i.e., the Hindus introduction of zero and the Muslins contributions to algebra. Christian also contributed an exclusive set of expectations required by science. Many Christians were not only scientist but researchers that validated that we existed in a methodical universe. They understood that revealing such knowledge would prove powerful in evidence that such a universe was shaped by a methodical
In a more simple way of putting it, they are both based off different aspects of human experience. Science explanations need to be based on evidence from examining the natural world. It is based on observations and experiments that are exinmed into further development or are abandoned completely for better experiments. Religion doesn't need to depend on the basis of evidence. Instead, it is involved on supernatural entities which cannot be explained by science.