Science: The Ptolemaic Paradigm

We discover scientific knowledge in various natural science fields such as biology or chemistry. A common misconception about the natural sciences is that both the knowledge they reveal to us and the scientific method used in discovering this are completely analytical. This means that many people believe subjectivity or creativity plays no part in scientific discovery. However, the scientific method is not a rigid system of just pursuing quantifiable facts. It oftentimes contains biases. With testing hypotheses, scientific observations, and inductive reasoning, science is indisputably erroneous and flawed. Paradigms, commonly seen as unerring, contribute to many of the errors involved in scientific discoveries today. Error and uncertainty play the most influential role when disputing

They help us make sense of reality. When a major paradigm is discovered to be wrong, it is overthrown and replaced with a new one. For example, when the Ptolemaic paradigm was replaced by the Copernican paradigm, a scientific revolution naturally occurred. This, in its simplest form, is known as a paradigm shift, a trigger that sends scientists from believing- or rather assuming- one thing, to following the ideas of something different. However, if the old paradigm is yet to be proven wrong, scientists continue to use that as much of their basis for experiments and hypotheses. When this occurs, they generally run into discrepancies or conflicts with other research. Scientists ignore these conflicts because one idea cannot typically be proven to override the others. These are not easily explained and thus categorized as insignificant. If the theory is well established it is believed that a few irregularities in research or in a conclusion won’t matter. It is believed that they are of little or even no object to the