Original Scientific Method

1000 Words2 Pages

The original scientific method was established during the Renaissance and is based upon induction. Induction is defined by philosopher J.S Mills as “consists in inferring from a finite number of observed instances of a phenomenon, that it occurs in all instances of a certain class that resemble the observed instances in certain ways.” Meaning this view of the scientific method begins with the particular observation of natural phenomena, and from this observation, a general principle is logically inferred. For example, after only seeing white dogs in my lifetime I induced all dogs are white. As such inductive reasoning is the inference of a universal law from a finite list of singular instances. Inductive reasoning is based upon three conditions, …show more content…

The force of this method originates from its logical difference between the inductive proof of a universal claim and the deductive falsification of a universal claim. As the falsification of statement can be inferred from one singular event. For example, once one non-white dog is observed my claim that all dogs are white is false. Thus, with popper’s method, a hypothesis must have falsifiability. A hypothesis is falsifiable if a logical observation can be made that is inconsistent or contradict with it. For example, the claim that all dogs are white is falsifiable, as an instance of a non-white dog is a logical possibility. Thus, a scientific hypothesis must make definite claims about the universe and have information that pertains to ruling out certain possibilities. A claim that may be true or false regardless of the world and those not inform us of the world is not falsifiable. For example, the claim “the next dog I see will be white” this statement may be true or false, for instance, if it were false it does not mean the next dog I see after this will not be white. As such if the observation contradicts with the prediction, the hypothesis is falsified. Thus, opposed to the original scientific method, the hypothetic-deductive method does not prove a hypothesis but rather show that they are a useful inference that has yet to be proven false. As popper’s method, does not deal with induction, the problems with induction as previously mentioned do not arise. However, it must be said that Popper's method is not without criticism. One such critic is whether the popper’s method is completely isolated from the use of inductive reasoning. As popper claims “laws are not justified by being proved by the data, they are justified by being not disproved by the data”. However, this statement also similarly to inductive reasoning, makes a logical leap that a hypothesis that has not yet

Open Document