Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The essay of scientific method
Importance Of Observation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The essay of scientific method
Introduction
For many years, conclusions were drawn in the science world based on people’s beliefs and common knowledge without the use of a scientific method to test and verify these assumptions (The scientific method, n.d).
In order to answer questions, reach conclusions and to prove theories, especially in the physical world, some scientists started to observe how things happen in the world and follow steps to explain their findings (Scientific method, 2008)). This way of investigating phenomena by following a sequence of steps that helps scientists to answer questions and prove an assumption is called the scientific method. The scientific method used by scientists varies and is not always the same, but they all follow a certain common steps when investigating something. According to The Scientific method (n.d) these steps consist of making and observation, raising a question formulating a hypothesis, making predictions, conducting experiments or tests and drawing a conclusion (theory).
Observation
Observation is an important step of the scientific method because it is when everything starts. In this step the scientist observe a fact or anything that happen in the world with his eyes or using a tool, such as a microscope (The scientific method, n.d).
Question
After making observations, it is important to raise a question regarding the phenomena being observed. A question has to be specific such as “How many foreign physical therapists work in the U.S?” because it leads to a single answer. If a question can generate multiple answers, a scientist would not be able to draw a conclusion because different variable would influence the results (The scientific method, n.d).
Hypothesis
With a question being determined a hypothesi...
... middle of paper ...
...operly organized in one place and facilitate the findings of relevant differences in data and or similarities, and in a graph in which complex information can be organized and represented in a way that is easy to explain and understand (Slutz and Hess, n.d). In a presentation, graph would be the ideal way to display data because it would draw people’s attention, stimulate their thinking and facilitate their understanding. A table would be a good pick when collecting data while performing an experiment. By placing the information in the right columns and rows, one could easily verify differences and similarities.
Conclusion
The scientific method consists of making observations, asking a question, formulating a hypothesis, making predictions, testing and drawing a conclusion, and can help scientists to prove an assumption that does not have a scientific explanation.
6. Some genuinely testable theories, when found to be false, are still upheld by their admirers-for example by introducing some ad hoc auxiliary assumption, or re-interpreting the theory ad hoc in such a way that it escapes refutation. However, such a method either destroys or lowers its scientific status.”
Having satisfied this researchers then make epistemological assumptions surrounding the subject matter. They must decide on the type of evidence to be collected, considering which evidence will deliver optimum validity. They must decide which stance to take during research, objective or neutral, considering which would be possible or even favourable. They must then think about how this can be best achieved. Should the research be classified as 'scientific' or 'unscientific' and what determines this?
First, when observations are made, hypothesises are formed. To test these hypothesises scientists conduct experiments. If their hypothesis is right, it is confirmed by further experiments and validated by other scientists. After many experiments and confirmations, a theory is formed. A scientific theory is a broad and general idea or explanation provided by scientists and is related to observations and is supported by a large amount of evidence. A theory is not a fact however it is just a possible explanation. An example of a theory is the Big Bang Theory.
The article Best Idea: Eyes Wide Open by Richard Powers discusses different aspects of the scientific method. It begins by talking about a man named Abu Ali al-Hasan Ibn al-Haytham who made discoveries regarding vision. He did this by simply performing observations and having people stare directly at the sun. Ibn al-Haytham changed the way science was viewed by telling people to simply look in order to gain information. Later, William of Ockham came up with the idea that “when you have multiple ways to explain something, go with the one that has the least amount of assumptions” (Powers, 1999, p. 4). My interpretation of this is that you shouldn’t make something harder than it needs to be. Do not assume, but rather work with the observations and experiments that you have performed. This idea eventually became known as Ockham’s Razor. Rene Descartes went in a different direction and believed that all science can be demonstrated by a series of deductions and self-evident facts, instead of something that is run through observation and experimentation.
Observation allows researchers to experience a specific aspect of social life and get a firsthand look at a trend, institution or behaviour. It promotes good communication skills, improves decision making and enhances awareness.
Scientists make progress by using the scientific method, a process of checking conclusions against nature. After observing something, a scientist tries to explain what has been seen. The explanation is called a hypothesis. There is always at least one alternative hypothesis. A part of nature is tested in a "controlled experiment" to see if the explanation matches reality. A controlled experiment is one in which all treatments are identical except that some are exposed to the hypothetical cause and some are not.
The scientific method is the analyzation of evidence, to examine a case from every angle possible, to not give up on an investigation until all of the angles are covered and to not allow personal emotions create a bias in their mind (Osterburg 2010). A scientific method example would be when an investigator arrives to a crime scene, they would first search the area for clues and see if something doesn’t seem right. Next they would have to search for different forms of evidence, most important would be trace evidence because it can provide DNA evidence which can also link a suspect to the crime. There are many more ways evidence and other clues can be harvested from a crime scene but it is up to the investigator to use their knowledge and help find the person responsible for the crime
Generally, science is a hotly discussed and vehemently debated topic. It is difficult to achieve consensus in science, considering the fact that ideas are diverse about even science definition, leave alone the true interpretations and meaning of scientific experiments, philosophies and discoveries. However, these arguments, disagreements as well as continuous trials to find a better reasoning, logic and explanation are exactly what have always been driving science progress from art to art form. It is worth noting that, in Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction, the Author-Samir Okasha explore various way of looking at science via the prism of life by citing a variety of scientific experiments, and providing examples from history of science.
The modern science view as well as the Scientific Revolution can be argued that it began with Copernicus’ heliocentric theory; his staunch questioning of the prior geocentric worldview led to the proposal of a new idea that the Earth is not in fact the center of the solar system, but simply revolving around the Sun. Although this is accepted as common sense today, the period in which Copernicus proposed this idea was ground-breaking, controversial, and frankly, world-changing. The Church had an immense amount of power, and was a force to be reckoned with; in the beginning of the Scientific Revolution, new scientific proposals and ideas were discouraged in many cases by the Church. A quote from Galileo’s Children does an excellent job summing up the conflict: “The struggle of Galileo against Church dogma concerning the nature of the cosmos epitomized the great, inevitable and continuing clash between religion and reason.” If evidence goes against scripture, the scientist is considered a heretic and is, like in Galileo’s case, forbidden to discuss the ideas any further. Galileo Galilei, who proposed solid evidence and theory supporting the heliocentric model, was forced to go back on his beliefs in front of several high officials, and distance himself from the Copernican model. This, luckily, allowed him to not be killed as a heretic, which was the next level of punishment for the crimes he was charged with, had he not went back on his beliefs. Incredible support was given through the young developing academies with a sense of community for scientists and academics; “Renaissance science academies represent a late manifestation of the humanist academy movement.” Since the Church was grounded traditionally evidence that went agains...
Prior to the 1990’s, the problem of scientific objectivity was a question many philosophers tried to grapple with. Initially, the Logical Positivist’s view of scientific objectivity was most popular. They held to the belief that science was overall objective because of the distinction between the “context of discovery” and “context of justification,” which still allowed for science to contain some subjective elements (Longino 172). Basically, Positivist’s allowed for subjective qualities, such as mental makeup of scientists and values scientist brought in to their scientific work, by stating that the initial formulation or “discovery” of hypothesis/theories included subjective qualities. However, these subjective characteristics were negated by the fact that when investigating theories scientists focused on comparing their hypothesis to observable consequences in an empirical and objective manor (“context of justification). Thus, this allowed the Positivist’s to “acknowledge the play of subjective factors in initial development of hypotheses and theories while guaranteeing that their acceptance [is] determined not by subjective preferences but by observed reality” (Longino 172). However, although this theory was popular for some period of time, a philosopher by the name of Helen Longino approached the problem of scientific objectivity in a different way. She believed that science was a social practice that involved the inevitable input of various subjective factors such as scientist’s values, beliefs, etc… when performing their work. However, she goes on to say that what made science objective was the process in which scientist performed their work. She essentially thought that if the process in which scientist gained knowledge wa...
Anything that can be studied is absolutely considered a science. When people think of science and the scientific method they most often think of chemicals. Human experiment’s can also be conducted and considered scientific. The scientific method can be used to study people. Simply start by asking a question, doing background research, and then constructing a hypothesis. When studying people or their culture you can absolutely start with these simple steps, therefore using science to study these people. After determining your hypothesis, you can test it with an experiment, record your results and form a conclusion. “Science is the best system yet devised for reducing subjective bias, error, untruths, lies, and frauds.” (Harris, 1994, Pg. 6) Harris states that using science is they best way to prevent errors or miscalculations. We use science everyday; to assess every situation, and every problem that we have, even when we don’t think we a...
Maree (2007; 172) explains that when gathering data, making use of samples is an easy and convenient way to get general findings about the population you are using for your study because in reality it is usually impossible to include the entire population in your study as the most two restrictions being time and c...
As Europe began to move out of the Renaissance, it brought with it many of the beliefs of that era. The continent now carried a questioning spirit and was eager for more to study and learn. Throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, many discoveries were made in subjects all across the realm of science, but it was the doubting and testing of old traditions and authorities that truly made this time into a revolution. The Scientific Revolution challenged the authority of the past by changing the view of nature from a mysterious entity to a study of mathematics, looking to scientific research instead of the Church, and teaching that there was much knowledge of science left to be discovered.
The steps that are included in most pre-college textbooks are defining the problem, gathering background information, forming a hypothesis, making observations, testing the hypothesis, drawing conclusions, and communicating the results, but this method is not used. One reason for this myth is the way results are published in research journals because it makes people believe that scientists follow a certain research plan. Philosophers have shown that no research procedure is applied by all scientists. Usually scientists use imagination, knowledge, perseverance, and other methods used by problem solvers. This myth teaches that science is not different from other challenges that humans face. This myth has a chance to be corrected because many newer textbooks are taking the method out of the discussions of
The Scientific Revolution was a controversial and revolutionary era of improvement and changes that transformed peoples’ views of science and ways of thinking. It was an emergence of modern science during the late 18th century, which was contributed to by scientists such as Copernicus and Galileo. Society was still heavily dominated and influenced by religion at the time, so people had trouble adjusting to the newfound facts. Developments in math and sciences wouldn’t have been able to transform views of society and nature without sparking controversies with the Church. The Church censored Copernicus and Galileo's theories not only because it threatened the traditional view of the world, but also because there was a personal conflict between Galileo and the Church.