Concept Summary      Chapter 2

People believe many things. Anything is possible, but how can ideas that are reasonable be separated from those that are merely conceivable? The use of the scientific method presupposes that the testing of beliefs is the first step in this process. To have any credibility beliefs must be vulnerable to disproof. Scientific method assumes the epistemology of empiricism to be valid. To test knowledge claims the logical implications of each belief must be checked with public observations of what takes place in the world. Scientists believe many strange things, but not without good reasons. For the vulnerability of testable ideas forces scientists to be cooperative and critical; they must confront, observe, and be more intimate with the world, rather than obscure it with ideas that are merely philosophically satisfying or comforting.

Although the critical process of science involves many patient, disciplinary techniques that promote objectivity (controlled studies, standards of replication and corroboration), our interaction with nature involves creativity and a complex web of ideas, assumptions, perspectives, influences, interpretations, and paradigms or world views. Ultimately, the support for all scientific explanations is based on inductive reasoning; no matter how successful an explanation is in making predictions, it is always possible for true predictions to be deduced from false theories. Hence, no scientific explanation can be known to be true absolutely. The essence of science is not the achievement of absolute truth, but long-term reliability and self-correction. The goal is to be pragmatic and obtain beliefs that have a reasonable chance of being true based on their track record of success in passing rigorous tests.

The field of epistemology, the study of knowledge, is most often associated with philosophical interest in science. The modern scientific method can be viewed as a synthesis of two epistemological traditions: the rationalist who placed great emphasis on reason, logic, and mathematics in the knowing process, and the empiricist who believed that only observational experience validates knowledge. Although philosophers of science generally agree that scientific method is ultimately based on the epistemological position of empiricism, modern scientific ideas, especially cosmological ones, are often the result of the contemplation of abstract mathematical trails.

If the results of science are based on inductive reasoning, and hence can never be certain, then the question arises as to whether science can be self-corrective. That an idea works is no guarantee that it will work in the future. Furthermore, correction implies that something is better. Can one idea be said to be better than another if it cannot be shown to be absolutely true? This philosophical question and many others that are often discussed in relation to science in turn have a bearing on the great questions of who we are, where we have come from, and what may be in store for us.