Theories are unproven hypotheses that serve as explanations for observations and events, so they must have a way of convincing people that they are true. A theory’s objectives are to explain and predict a phenomenon. Most ideas are not convincing without solid evidence or proof. The human sciences and natural sciences have different ways of showing the validity of a hypothesis. The natural sciences, which include subject areas such as physics, chemistry, and biology, depend on physical proof through experiments with several trials. The human sciences, which include subject areas such as sociology, economics, anthropology, and psychology, are based on human interaction, logic, and the collection of data.
Information about both areas of knowledge can be gained through sense perception, reason, and emotion. An idea in the natural sciences must be pragmatic in order to confirm its authenticity. For example I have done several experiments in my chemistry class this year. The experiments always start off with hypotheses that can be tested. It is vital to test the experiment multiple times in order to decrease the chances of making errors. Numerous trials also increase the chances of the experiment producing the expected results. During an experiment, sense perception is used to collect data. Changes that can be seen, heard, smelled, or felt support the hypothesis and make it even more convincing. Observations through sense perception are clearly one of the most important factors in determining whether or not an experiment is valid.
As for the human sciences, theories cannot always be tested. Sometimes logic and inferences must be used in order to come to a conclusion. Reason and emotion play a significant role in how persuasive a theo...
... middle of paper ...
...make scientific theories convincing. Substantial evidence can make the biggest skeptic a believer. If the evidence is clearly justified, then there is little room to argue that a theory is false. A detailed explanation can also make a theory convincing, and without one it would be difficult to believe that it is true. If a scientist takes the time to clearly explain his experiment and the evidence, more people will understand and accept the theory. Overall, the theories in the human and natural sciences are convincing because of their supporting details and way that they are presented.
Works Cited
Abel, Reuben. Man is the Measure. New York: The Free Press, 1976. Print.
"Biology." Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica Online School Edition.
Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 2011. Web.15 Dec. 2011.
.
Popperian hypothetico deductivists would find several problems with the view of science Alan Chalmers stated in ‘What is this thing Called Science?’ From “Scientific knowledge is proven knowledge” to “Scientific knowledge is reliable knowledge because it is objectively proven” popper would disagree to everything. With Chalmers falsificationism or hypothetico-deductivism view, his statement indicates that scientific induction is completely justifiable. However as it is now known, induction is not a reasonable way to prove or justify science.
Any hypothesis, Gould says, begins with the collection of facts. In this early stage of a theory development bad science leads nowhere, since it contains either little or contradicting evidence. On the other hand, Gould suggests, testable proposals are accepted temporarily, furthermore, new collected facts confirm a hypothesis. That is how good science works. It is self-correcting and self-developing with the flow of time: new information improves a good theory and makes it more precise. Finally, good hypotheses create logical relations to other subjects and contribute to their expansion.
There are many definitions to theory. According to Akers (2009) “theories are tentative answers to the commonly asked questions about events and behavior” (Akers, (2009, p. 1). Theory is a set of interconnect statements that explain how two or more things are related in two casual fashions, based upon a confirmed hypotheses and established multiple times by disconnected groups of researchers.
Messenger, E., Gooch, J., & Seyler, D. U. (2011). Arguing About Science. Argument! (pp. 396-398). New York, NY: Mcgraw-Hill Co..
Persuasion goes on around us everyday, all the time, on television, on advertisements, even in conversations with friends. Perhaps because of this, much has been written on how to persuade more effectively. Most of this literature is built upon the notion that to persuade is to urge successfully and completely. Going along these lines, certainty and confidence are logical complements to effective persuasion, since we cannot hope to convince others when we are ourselves in doubt. Doubt, therefore, is felt to be at the other end of the spectrum and antithetical to persuasion. But the art of persuasion is a human art, and so it is a living art, which cannot be satisfactorily summed up between the covers of self-improvement guides. In reality, successful persuasion can somewhat deviate from the conventional criteria of certainty; in fact, even doubt can be used to persuade.
Upon reading Will to Believe, there is no doubt we will all begin to question how we’ve gotten to our beliefs and why we believe what we do. William James argues against forced beliefs and expresses the importance of choice. The idea of choice is one I strongly agree with. Although we are easily influenced by others, when it comes to beliefs free will must come into play. As far as the science method, which I have discussed, a belief is just as valid whether there is evidence or not because most scientific methods will never be one hundred percent proven and they will change over
In many aspects of our lives, the use of faith as a basis for knowledge can be found. Whether it is faith in the advice of your teacher, faith in a God or faith in a scientific theory, it is present. But what is faith? A definition of faith in a theory of knowledge context is the confident belief or trust in a knowledge claim by a knower, without the knower having conclusive evidence. This is because if a knowledge claim is backed up by evidence, then we would use reason rather than faith as a basis for knowledge . If we define knowledge as ‘justified true belief’, it can be seen that faith, being without justification, can never fulfill this definition, and so cannot be used as a reliable basis for knowledge. However, the question arises, what if a certain knowledge claim lies outside of the realm of reason? What if a knowledge claim cannot be justified by empirical evidence and reasoning alone, such as a religious knowledge claim? It is then that faith allows the knower to decide what is knowledge and what is not, when something cannot be definitively proved through the use of evidence. When assessing faith as a basis for knowledge in the natural sciences, the fact arises that without faith in the research done before us, it is impossible to develop further knowledge on top of it. Yet at the same time, if we have unwavering faith in existing theories, they would never be challenged, and so our progress of knowledge in the natural sciences would come to a standstill. Although I intend to approach this essay in a balanced manner, this essay may be subject to a small degree of bias, due to my own non-religious viewpoint.
Wilby, P. (2007, February). Persuasion is a science. New Statesman, 136(4833), 15. Retrieved May 4, 2011, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1223180481).
There are six elements that make a theory sound. These elements are scientific criteria provide whether or not the theories are scientific. The most important of these elements is empirical validity, which uses evidence to confirm or disprove a theory and have criteria for interpreting data as factual, irregular or unrelated. The other major elements include internal logical consistency, scope and parsimony, testability, and usefulness and policy implication. A theory must be logically consistent. In order to be so, it must have clearly defined concepts, have logically stated and internally consistent propositions. If a theory contains pointless ideas or is inconsistent, it can't really explain anything. Scope refers to the assortment of events that it propositions to explain.
Many times we have been in a dilemma whether to believe or not someone who tries to persuade us for something and very often by listening his arguments and by having enough evidence we finally manage to get out of the dilemma. Nevertheless sometimes we cannot be sure about an event because although there is enough evidence, our minds cannot be persuaded. An example to justify that is the existence of the Loch Ness monster, or as it is widely known “Nessie”.
Demarcation between science and non-science or pseudo science is particularly important in scientific education, as it determines, for almost every member of our society, what they will accept as true regarding science, particularly creationism and evolution. Having public ...
This essay examines the advantages and disadvantages of using a method primarily for gathering research on human subjects that can be examined for later use. It will give a basic outline of the methods of investigation, their uses and their suitability. I will also look at the scientific method as a whole and examine the criticisms of this method using the writings of Hume and Popper.
A theory is a way organizing and systematizing what is known about a phenomenon. It is, in fact, “a rationalized set of assumptions or hypotheses that provides a person with tools that can be utilized to explain the past and predict the future” (Johnson, 2000). Therefore, theories provide direction and when tested and supported, can assist in expanding our knowledge.
After considering all the described points in this paper, it can be rightly said that there is a considerable difference between science and other types of knowledge.
The exact definition of theory is a system of ideas intended to explain something. When focusing on Natural sciences, theory is defined as a set of principles that predict and explain a phenomena. When focusing on Human sciences the key words are to study and interpret social phenomena within a thought. The most important key words that one has to keep in mind are interpret, predict and explain. Acknowledging this, theories come in different category’s such as: Descriptive theories, theories predicting a phenomena and theories that explain a phenomena.