Induction And Falsification Essay

876 Words 4 Pages
It is a common belief that knowledge, coming from science, must be rational. Natural philosophers, known as scientists, use a method based on experimentation to arrive to scientific knowledge. Due to the nature of this process, it is common to assume that this information must be truth. However, when determining what classifies as scientific knowledge and how science works, there is much more to take into account
Therefore, the aim of this essay is to analyze the claim made by Allan Chalmers, and to discuss Popper’s perspective towards this claim. To accomplish this, I will introduce two major approaches to science, induction and falsification. Furthermore, I will examine the problems each theory has and how they are able to compliment each other.
Firstly, I will introduce induction. Induction is defined as an intuitive mental process that begins with observation, which produces general principles and laws. Induction can be paired with
…show more content…
Nonetheless, I my opinion one compliment the other. The limitation of one is the strength of the other. For instance in induction, the question that arises is whether this claims or laws can be wrong or disproof. For example, imagine a scenario where a scientist is observing an object’s reaction to a situation. The scientist observes the same results over a series of trials and concludes that under certain conditions the object will always react in the same way. Nonetheless, if the object reacts in a different way, would the previous conclusion be disproved and would that information be false and unreliable? This hypothetical situation is considered a problem in induction because it is hard to incorporate new knowledge and to falsify previous one. While induction does not do much when encountering new information that can disprove scientific knowledge, the hypothethico-deductivism method does incorporate a solution to this flaw by using

Related Documents