Scientific Method Science philosophy involves itself in the methodology of science. Empirical knowledge – by observation - The Enlightenment (16-17 th.

Scientific MethodScientific Method

Science philosophy involves itself in the Science philosophy involves itself in the methodology of science.methodology of science.

Empirical knowledgeEmpirical knowledge – by observation – by observation

- The Enlightenment (16-17- The Enlightenment (16-17thth C.) C.)

Science can’t observe everythingScience can’t observe everything

There is no causal relationship between an There is no causal relationship between an event and timeevent and time

HumeHume

Thus science can’t ‘prove’ anythingThus science can’t ‘prove’ anything - - All swans are whiteAll swans are white

- Water always boils at 100 degrees- Water always boils at 100 degrees

Science can’t prove anythingScience can’t prove anything

Science can only ‘disprove’ things.Science can only ‘disprove’ things.

--FalsificationFalsification

Science Theory vs Science RealityScience Theory vs Science Reality

Scientific revolutionsScientific revolutions

Thomas Kunh (1922-1996)Thomas Kunh (1922-1996)

When there’s a conflict between When there’s a conflict between observation & hypothesis - what do observation & hypothesis - what do

you do?you do?

1.1. Reject the hypothesisReject the hypothesis

2.2. Reject the observationReject the observation

3.3. Accept both and make an auxiliary Accept both and make an auxiliary hypothesishypothesis

Rationalist vs EmpiricistRationalist vs Empiricist

RationalistsRationalists think reason is the main source think reason is the main source of knowledge – thus they will support a of knowledge – thus they will support a beautiful theorybeautiful theory

EmpiricistsEmpiricists thinks experience is the main thinks experience is the main source of knowledge – thus they will source of knowledge – thus they will usually follow the datausually follow the data

In reality scientists are a bit of bothIn reality scientists are a bit of both

But unfortunately, this means that even falsification cannot 100%

prove anything

Science vs ReligionScience vs Religion

Relativist attacks on scienceRelativist attacks on science

Science can’t prove anything - so it’s all just Science can’t prove anything - so it’s all just theory - so you can’t really know 100% for theory - so you can’t really know 100% for sure about anything, such as carbon sure about anything, such as carbon dating, or evolution, or continental drift, or dating, or evolution, or continental drift, or anything - so you can’t really be sure that anything - so you can’t really be sure that God didn’t create the Earth 5000 years God didn’t create the Earth 5000 years ago.ago.

Scientific attacks on religionScientific attacks on religion

If there is a god, then prove it!If there is a god, then prove it!

Dawkins vs GodDawkins vs God

Science and Religion stomping all over each Science and Religion stomping all over each others’ turfothers’ turf

Histories naughty siblingsHistories naughty siblings

Religion mis-uses relativism to claim all Religion mis-uses relativism to claim all ways of knowing are equalways of knowing are equal

Science mis-uses it’s dominant position to Science mis-uses it’s dominant position to undermine other forms of knowingundermine other forms of knowing