More handpicked essays just for you.
Explain the scientific method essay
Explain the scientific method and why it is so important
Explain the scientific method and why it is so important
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the eyes of René Descartes, the scientific method is a systematic approach to the acquisition, testing, and acceptance of knowledge. Through his Discourse on Method, Descartes outlines what is, in his opinion, the most reliable means of scientific inquiry. That is, using pure reason and rationale to reach undeniably valid conclusions. This is evident in the way he presents his procedure for conducting scientific endeavors. He states that one must begin with skepticism towards all of the commonly accepted scientific ‘truths’ (Descartes, Discourse Part 5, Section 41). Once these potentially invalid ideas have been expelled from the body of current scientific knowledge via rigorous, systematic doubt, new ideas that are discovered in accordance …show more content…
Although this methodology as a whole, due to its systematic nature, ensures that scientific knowledge is reliable, valid and capable of covering as large a range of problems as possible, it is also impractical in some ways. Descartes admits that, when following this scientific method to the letter, one man alone cannot reason his way through each of the foundational ideas, followed by the more complicated ones, and perform all of the necessary experiments along the way, before he reaches the end of his lifespan (Descartes, Discourse Part 6, Section 65). Likely in response to this obstacle, Descartes also provides his thoughts about publishing scientific truths once they are uncovered using his method. He emphasizes the importance of communicating newly acquired knowledge to the public, so that one man may begin where another has left off, and their combined contribution may be of greater significance than either man’s individual achievement would have been (Descartes, Discourse Part 6, Section …show more content…
He accomplishes this by opening Part 5 of his Discourse with his view that one should not “accept anything as true that” does not seem “clearer and more certain than the demonstrations of the geometers” (Descartes, Discourse Part 5, Section 41). In other words, any idea that is not as clear to him as a geometer’s ‘demonstration,’ he views as dubious until he can, through reason, conclude otherwise. This can be interpreted to indicate that in devising his approach to science, Descartes also put a strong emphasis on the need to question the validity of everything. Not only does this initial reference to the geometers telegraph the idea that science should start by doubting everything, it also serves to foreshadow the rest of his methodology, which will approach the discovery of truths in much of the same systematic way geometers approach the writing of a proof. By specifically using the word ‘demonstration,’ in conjunction with the concept of geometry proofs, Descartes conveys to the reader of his Discourse an image of ordered logical steps that, through reason alone, ‘demonstrate’ or prove some piece of knowledge. This technique, that is to say, beginning with an incontrovertible set of truths, similar to the initial assumptions of geometry proofs, and through reason, deriving a series of statements which must also be true, is the main foundation on
Baird and Kaufmann, the editors of our text, explain in their outline of Descartes' epistemology that the method by which the thinker carried out his philosophical work involved first discovering and being sure of a certainty, and then, from that certainty, reasoning what else it meant one could be sure of. He would admit nothing without being absolutely satisfied on his own (i.e., without being told so by others) that it was incontrovertible truth. This system was unique, according to the editors, in part because Descartes was not afraid to face doubt. Despite the fact that it was precisely doubt of which he was endeavoring to rid himself, he nonetheless allowed it the full reign it deserved and demanded over his intellectual labors. "Although uncertainty and doubt were the enemies," say Baird and Kaufmann (p.16), "Descartes hit upon the idea of using doubt as a tool or as a weapon. . . . He would use doubt as an acid to pour over every 'truth' to see if there was anything that could not be dissolved . . . ." This test, they explain, resulted for Descartes in the conclusion that, if he doubted everything in the world there was to doubt, it was still then certain that he was doubting; further, that in order to doubt, he had to exist. His own existence, therefore, was the first truth he could admit to with certainty, and it became the basis for the remainder of his epistemology.
Descartes’ method is ultimately about finding the truth within yourself. He says that there are two types of people that would not benefit from his method: those who think they know more than they do and who lack the patience for such careful work, and those who are modest enough to think that they are more capable of finding out the truth if they follow a teacher. Descartes also creates a three to four maxim moral code to guide his behavior while he experiences his period...
Sor Juana’s letter Response to Sor Filotea, Aphra Behn’s short story Oronooko, and Rene Descartes’s methodology statement The Discourse on Method all touch on the consequences of knowledge. Consequences of knowledge are present in each author’s work, and their explanation fits with the certain time of their work was published. When Descartes’s The Discourse on Method was published he received criticism; stating that his methodology was close to atheism; since the things that could be doubted were infinite. Descartes method was introduced during the Enlightenment period; a time when everyone yearned for all the knowledge available. In this period knowledge equaled power, but Descartes stated that known facts can be doubts if there is uncertainty.
This step in Descartes method puts him in a supreme position above all error, making him perfect. When speaking of God, he incorporates his fascination with mathematics and compares God with geometry. Descartes writes, “Consequently it is at least certain God, who is a being so perfect, is, or exists, as any demonstration of geometry can possibly be.” (Descartes, 26). Here we see that God is a complex puzzle that needs to be solved. God is compared to geometry and Descartes thinks God is a problem that he is able to figure out, like one studying a math problem. Descartes moves to Holland where he is not able to speak the language, therefore he does not need to be bothered by people and can be alone with his thoughts. Descartes is totally wrong, he removed himself from the community and believes that he is the ultimate authority in all things. We must shine the light of truth on these errors because those lacking in proper formation can be fooled into believing this is truth. Descartes minimizes God to a math problem that needs to be solved, he makes himself the authority of truth and breaks with any type of community that could provide
In his work, Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes narrates the search for certainty in order to recreate all knowledge. He begins with “radical doubt.” He asks a simple question “Is there any one thing of which we can be absolutely certain?” that provides the main question of his analysis. Proceeding forward, he states that the ground of his foundation is the self – evident knowledge of the “thinking thing,” which he himself is. Moving up the tower of certainty, he focuses on those ideas that can be supported by his original foundation. In such a way, Descartes’s goal is to establish all of human knowledge of firm foundations. Thus, Descartes gains this knowledge from the natural light by using it to reference his main claims, specifically
In the New Merriam Webster Dictionary, sophism is defined as a plausible but fallacious argument. In Rene Descartes Meditation V, he distinguishes the existence of God, believing he must prove that god exists before he can examine any corporeal objects outside of himself. By proving that the existence of God is not a sophism, he also argues that God is therefore the Supreme Being and the omnipotent one. His conclusion that God does exist enables him to prove the existence of material things, and the difference between the soul and the body.
Descartes asserts knowledge is done through experimentation using a scientifc method to removing opinions, and come up with a solution to conflicts. In the Discourse on Method, Descartes describes his unique style of reasoning, and makes clear that his main goal for writing is to solve epistemology, or the theory of knowledge. Similar to Socrates, Descartes sensory perceptions cause a false belief in the world around us, he believes one needs to be thinking on the intelligible level, however Descartes provides a different method to achieving this goal.
“Cogito ergo sum;” I think therefore I am. This philosophical statement stimulated a renaissance in the field of philosophy, creating modern Western philosophy as is known today. This important notion was dictated by Rene Descartes in his 1641 metaphysics work, Mediations on First Philosophy, and influenced all modern philosophical works written after Descartes revolutionary achievement. This work was written at a time when modern physics was being developed as a mathematization of nature. The principles of metaphysics contain in Meditations were developed in order to serve as the basis for this new system of physics. In it, Descartes refutes many Aristotelian beliefs that were popular and accepted by the clergy for nearly the entirety of Christianity, most notably the idea that all knowledge originates from the senses. Descartes’ opus magnum introduces an entirely new philosophical method, radically different from the traditional Socratic Method, and uses this in order to open his eyes and see through his own false opinions. In Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes utilizes his methodology of determining the truth to doubt away the foundations of all that he knows, in order to determine that he exists, what he is, how he knows this better than he knows any physical thing, and how he knows that God exists.
Firstly, Descartes talks about “proofs” of the existence of God, explained in his third and fifth meditation. Meaning, his proofs are shown by experiment to prove that God exists. He reinterprets Archimedes ' saying, “required only one fixed and immovable point to move the whole earth from its place, I can hope for great things if I can even find one small thing that is certain and unshakeable (Descartes 159).” That he could shift the entire earth
The question now is how are we to doubt everything? Descartes claims that we are fooled by our minds, meaning we do not really know what is false or not. For instance, one a hot day you look at a the ground at a distance and think you see water, but in reality the heat rising from the ground which from a certain angle looks like water but then when you get closer you see the ground not water. In addition, Descartes que...
The teaching of Descartes has influenced many minds since his writings. Descartes' belief that clear and distinct perceptions come from the intellect and not the senses was critical to his ultimate goal in Meditations on First Philosophy, for now he has successfully created a foundation of true and certain facts on which to base a sold, scientific belief structure. He has proven himself to exist in some form, to think and therefore feel, and explains how he knows objects or concepts to be real.
While on his journey to reveal the absolute truths and debunk anything that could be considered doubtful, Descartes’ experiences using this form of skepticism has allowed him to
Throughout the six meditations on First Philosophy, French philosopher Rene Descartes seeks to find a concrete foundation for the basis of science, one which he states can only include certain and unquestionable beliefs. Anything less concrete, he argues will be exposed to the external world and to opposition by philosophical sceptics.
...ll true knowledge is solely knowledge of the self, its existence, and relation to reality. René Descartes' approach to the theory of knowledge plays a prominent role in shaping the agenda of early modern philosophy. It continues to affect (some would say "infect") the way problems in epistemology are conceived today. Students of philosophy (in his own day, and in the history since) have found the distinctive features of his epistemology to be at once attractive and troubling; features such as the emphasis on method, the role of epistemic foundations, the conception of the doubtful as contrasting with the warranted, the skeptical arguments of the First Meditation, and the cogito ergo sum--to mention just a few that we shall consider. Depending on context, Descartes thinks that different standards of warrant are appropriate. The context for which he is most famous, and on which the present treatment will focus, is that of investigating First Philosophy. The first-ness of First Philosophy is (as Descartes conceives it) one of epistemic priority, referring to the matters one must "first" confront if one is to succeed in acquiring systematic and expansive knowledge.
Descartes' philosophy was an attempt to create a genuine foundation upon which further scientific developments would be established. His devotion to math's methodic nature and invariability lead him to apply these concepts to all other ideas. He hypothesized that "those propositions which one could come to understand completely would be self evident, since one's knowledge about them would not depend upon knowledge of any other propositions; therefore they were suitable to stand as fundamental assumptions, to be the starting points from which other propositions could be deduced" (Walting).