According To Plato's Views Of Science And Knowledge

Good Essays
According to Plato, science can only provide opinions, not knowledge. We all know that there are many types of sciences, different ranks of them and also theories and concepts. Plato focused specifically on Astronomy, he believed the earth as a spherical one. Today we can see different value systems, whether the people are religious or not some type of science is agreeable and disagreeable. Moreover, the ones who practice science and have studied, have a sense of “knowledge;” for them at least.
Science gives us opinions, not knowledge. The particular that believes science provides knowledge surely would dispraise this belief solely. Those are who reckon with the idea that “science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge
…show more content…
I will argue that science does not come from the roots of science and its theories. Science, in general, can give a full explanation to one thing, but does not fully fulfill the other. For instance, one can have a headache and there can be so many reasons as to why; one doctor can tell you “maybe you 're not drinking enough water,” but another can explicitly tell you what is precisely going on in your body. Therefore, if science is knowledge, then how come, two different doctors don’t agree upon an explanation? The issue is that science has diverse theories, many people decide to believe, however, there are some parts of science constrain the person’s beliefs. How can you believe in one part of science and not the …show more content…
Since you don’t fully know it you may use what you know to give an answer or analysis (in this case scientific reasoning). In other words, if science provides knowledge, then why is it that doctor’s themselves are not completely sure when it comes to the results of a diagnosis of a patient? Keeping in mind that knowledge is the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. Doctors go to school for about 10-12 years, in the midst of all that they have hands-on practice (practical understanding). Why is it then that at times have they not solutions to one’s physical crisis? Is it maybe lack of knowledge? Those who carry knowledge have the ability to shift their intellect (what they know) and incline to a different perspective on

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Pragmatism discards the idea that the teleos of thought is to define, embody, or reflect reality. Instead, pragmatists consider thought an instrument for prediction, problem solving and action. William James says that truth happens to an idea in science when three things occur: when theories or laws provide a more intelligible answer; when it leads to pragmatic ends and when it facilitates scientific conversation. But the thing is, we don’t have this objective knowledge. Because of this we cannot follow the scientific positivist view of…

    • 1321 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    When it comes to truth I tend to be more of a relativist, perspective list or pluralist. I don’t believe that there is such thing absolute truth. Everyone has their own truth which in most cases can’t be applied exactly to others. As people are all different, there are different situations and different experiences that make up our lives. What is true for me mightn’t be true for someone else, because we have different perceptions.…

    • 1384 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Science deals with our understanding of the physical world around us. We use it to test theories that we’ve formed through observation. By actively testing the theories with the intent of disproving them, we gather more information that supports our idea. However, pseudoscience is a belief that is often presented as being scientific, but does not hold up against the scientific method because it cannot be tested or disproven. Popper discusses that it is an issue when someone considers pseudoscience to be a science.…

    • 1523 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Theories are explanations. If a hypothesis asks what, then it is a law. A law is a description of why or how things happen. They are all connected but they all have different ways of interpreting science. If someone tells a scientist that “it’s just a theory” then he would be offended because a theory is backed up by so many different experiments.…

    • 779 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The aims of this essay are to establish the differences between science, pseudo-science and non-science, before then examining the appropriate categorization of “creationism science”. Science, pseudo-science and non-science do have there own characteristics. Sciences’ goal is to discover what our universe beholds and define why it is and how it is (Curd and Cover, 1998). One of science’s most substantial characteristics is the formation of theories. Scientists mostly use a general theory to explain their observations and experiments rather than simply recording the results.…

    • 1344 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    It’s a characteristic method in philosophy where all beliefs are subjected to doubt until they are found to be true. The proposition at hand here can be subjected to doubt. This is because it’s a scientific belief which is not completely accurate. In addition to this there are many other beliefs opposing this particular one which might be true. Using Descartes method as reference the Earth revolving around the sun is just a belief.…

    • 1375 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    And even if there is an equation between religion and science it is in basal or general. Meanwhile, if examined more deeply it will make a significant difference. But it turns out though saintist assume so many things or points of tangency between religion and science. The source of science is the empirical nature. They assume that the empirical nature itself occurs without any creators.…

    • 2039 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Essay Of Empiricism

    • 753 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Many people might disagree with this, but they need to remember that most things in science are not proven. Science is basically a collection of theories that help us better understand the world. Einstein’s theory of general relativity cannot be proven for sure, but we take it as a fact. Psychology is also a group of theories that psychologists put together after their own studies of the human mind. It cannot be proven for sure like many other science theories, but it is always open to be disproved as time goes on and technology advances.…

    • 753 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Richard DeWitt proposes multiple theories in his book, World Views: An Introduction to the History and Philosophy of Science, which explains the complex relationships that the facts, truths, and science share. The main problem with truth in scientific reasoning that DeWitt tries to get across is what makes a true statement or belief true, what makes a false statement or belief false, what do true statements have in common, and what do false statements have in common (DeWitt). There is not a proper solution as to what makes a statement or belief true, but there are theories that DeWitt explains in the chapter “Truth.” DeWitt proposes two main theories of truth they are the correspondence theories of truth and the coherence theories (DeWitt). The correspondence theory of truth states that something is made true if it corresponds with reality. In order for something to be made true in terms of…

    • 1202 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    To illustrate this concept, an example from the history of astronomy can be utilized. The geocentric model of the universe states that the Earth is the center of the universe and all planets revolve around. This was the dominant theory that held from the times of Ancient civilizations up until the 1500s, when the Renaissance astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus championed an opposing theory. He stated that the solar system followed the heliocentric model, in which the sun was the center. In this example, the geocentric model is indeed a scientific theory because Copernicus, along with Kepler and Newton, was able to disprove it or falsify it.…

    • 1135 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays

Related Topics