The Philosophy of Science (page 6)

Frazzled UBM

I think a question that goes to the core of the Philosophy of Science is whether a scientific law is true and whether a scientific theory (evolution for example) is or could be true. If not, then what role does science play in the pursuit of truth. In this context you might what think about what the concept of truth means to you. I am not looking for definitive answers because I don't think there are any but I am interested in views and debate.

Oubliette

Frazzled, you raised some very interesting topics for discussion.

I'm at work now, but I've read your posts. Later, when I've had some time to think, I'll respond.

Thanks,

Oubliette

cofty

whether a scientific law is true and whether a scientific theory (evolution for example) is or could be true. If not, then what role does science play in the pursuit of truth.

I genuinely don't understand the question.

jgnat

Here's a complex problem that science unravelled. Why are our bees dying? It wasn't a single cause, which would have been fairly easy to figure out. I don't see how anything other than the scientific method could have unravelled this puzzle.

http://www.ted.com/talks/marla_spivak_why_bees_are_disappearing

I predict that the more complex medical puzzles of our day will finally be solved, even though they are not simple either-or scenarios. Take insulin for instance. In this case, it is the balance between insulin and sugar that had to be figured out.

I would like to see health plagues like depression and schizophrenia resolved.

Maybe we will need multidisciplinary teams, like engineers with biological scientists. Or chemical engineers with biologists.

cofty

Good example Jgnat. Schizophrenia has defied all attempts to discover it's cause.

So far, bad parenting, genetics, brain chemistry, viruses, foetal development and diet have all been blamed.

The only thing known for a certainty is that bad parenting isn't a factor.

talesin

Hmmm - I am not sure this thread is actually about the Philosophy of Science as opposed to Scientific Method. The Philosophy of Science is about scietific knowledge and truth - what is scientific knowledge and how does it relate to truth? HOw does cscientific method deal with uncertainty and inconsistency? Has scientific knowledge advanced in a linear way or does it lurch from one paradigm to another with scientific research trapped within the bounds of the current paradigm. Oubliette - do you know what Popperian falsification theory is? Have read or heard of Thomas Kuhn?

THat is the question - I thought it would be obvious, since it was the only one she asked..

Have you heard of Kuhn? What are your thoughts on this? Or are you avoiding this, because you have not studied philosophy?

hmmm?

tal

*dismiss-me-not klass*

Oubliette

THat is the question - I thought it would be obvious, since it was the only one she asked..

Talesin, not sure what your problem is.

FUBM asked five questions. I answered every one. Perhaps the answers weren't to your liking. No matter. I answered them all.

This thread is not about you, me, Cofty or FUBM. It IS about the Philosophy of Science. Please address the OP or refrain from posting.

Thank you.

Oubliette.

Bugbear

Philosophy is the only way to find the truth and reality and reason behind old teachings and dogmas. But philosophy must always be based on scientifically proven facts. Even old Greek philosophers did understand that the earth was “ball formed”, (they could proof it mathematically), but religious dogmas and superstition washed away true knowledge to the four corners of the earth.

Today philosophers, still have problems with people who prefer to hear the good old words from either the Bible or the Koran or some other religious documents. They never use “critical thinking” or analysis of the texts, or they don´t dare to put the words into their right context.

Why is that? Are their brains stuffed with hay? Are their brains brainwashed and poisoned with false thinking (Philosophical), or are they just afraid of losing their friends family’s or jobs?

How can Philosophers enlighten all these billions of people who refuse to use modern science? Obviously a majority of the world still believe in demons angels, witches with tragically consequence.

But as I often have heard from the soc. : don’t use the Bible as a stone and hit people in their head with the striking light that could frighten them….

We must understand that a lot of us humans cannot bear the thought of a godless world. They are to frightened for what is coming next.

bugbear

Oubliette

Bugbear: But philosophy must always be based on scientifically proven facts.

I'm not sure what you mean by this statement. There are obviously a variety of branches of philosophy.

The particular area that I had in mind when I started this thread was of course that which is assosicated with the scientific approach to understanding and gaining knowledge. In that regard, the philosophy is a means to gain knowledge. We sometimes refer to some various pieces of that knowledge as facts, theories or laws. This knowledge is gained as a result of a particular philosophical approach and not the other way around.

Also, we have to keep in mind that any and all of these facts, theories and laws are subject to revision as new discoveries are made.

It really is an iterative process and is also the result of the collaboration of countless individuals, both working cooperatively together and also over time as each successive generation builds on the knowledge and discoveries of the past. As Isaac Newton wrote in 1676 in a letter to Robert Hooke:

"What Descartes did was a good step. You have added much several ways, and especially in taking the colours of thin plates into philosophical consideration. If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants."

I think that quote nicely ties together how philosophy and science are inseparable in their quest for knowledge and understanding.

Bugbear: a lot of us humans cannot bear the thought of a godless world. They are to frightened for what is coming next.

True dat!

Oubliette

I've been going back and reviewing this thread and seeing some really good comments that I previously missed.

Viviane: I do love science. It's how we learn new things. ... it IS a meat grinder of ideas. Only the best ideas with evidence survive. Personal bias is removed over time, it's open to all who wish to learn and it is absolutely bursting with creative thinking and imagination.

Awesome comment. Really good, thanks!

This is, I think, one of the most important aspects of the scientific approach to knowledge, personal bias is removed, at least as much as is humanly possible.

It also explains why this tool is so devastating to false beliefs such as the "theology" of JWs and other manipulative cults.

The Philosophy of Science

Share this