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
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