Values And Values Of Science

Good Essays
Science is a collaborative effort founded upon the curiosity innate in all humans. This curiosity drove us to create systems of inquiry to satisfy our need to explain things. Adopting the tools and values of science would benefit society as a whole. The tools of science are not the focus of my discussion here, as I believe that, while vital to science, they are not as universally useful within society as the values they were built upon. The values of science are not merely a prerequisite to implementing these tools, but do themselves foster curiosity and the drive to seek answers to one 's problems. Kuhn and Thagard each provide some shared values or practices of a scientific community that they view as vital components of science. Science …show more content…
The tools of science are not the apparati with which science is executed, such as scales and telescopes, nor the theories science generates to explain things, though both are useful instruments in their own right. I refer instead to the habitual processes which science relies upon. The most prominent tool is the scientific method which serves to direct one 's inquiry. Other useful tools include gathering data, controlling for variables, and repeating experiments. When I talk about the values of science, I believe that they are the result of scientific communities attempting to define how to reach their goals, which I will argue further when discussing Kuhn’s values. Science is a process through which a community generates knowledge, not a collection of facts. I distinguish between the conclusions of science, and the process by which they were arrived …show more content…
The values Kuhn lists as “characteristics of a good scientific theory” (Kuhn 95) that the scientific community uses to judge which theories can become part of their shared knowledge base illuminate the reasons that the practice of science is persistent. The characteristics he lists by which to judge a theory (accurate, consistent, broad scope, simple, and fruitful of new research) point to underlying values of science. The first two point to assumptions that science is based upon: that the universe can in fact be described with accuracy, and that such descriptions will be true and consistent regardless of circumstance. I feel that the last three characteristics that Kuhn lists say more about human nature, and hint at why we do science. The desire for broad scope, that “a theory’s consequences should extend far beyond the particular observations, laws, or sub theories it was initially designed to explain” (95), and for simplicity, where we seek to order disparate phenomena into logical groups, point to a desire for completeness, for some theory that is broad enough to explain the entire universe. When explaining his fifth value, fruitfulness, Kuhn states that a theory should generate new research by “disclos[ing] new phenomena or previously united relationships among those already known” (95). This final value is somewhat self-serving, valuing theories that will lead to the

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    He invokes thought into questions such as how scientists agree or disagree with Kuhn’s ideas about science as well as if the concept of intelligent design is a scientific theory, or merely religious philosophy. What is science? Science is a type of critical thinking undergone by people in order to explain nature in the simplest way…

    • 1819 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Induction Methodology

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Hume (n.d.) believed that this method did not provide clear and consistence approach to solve any scientific phenomena (as cited in Schick, 2000). Also, Schick (2000) said that Popper believed in the logical deduction methodology in testing the hypothesis; hence the induction has no role in scientific theory. Popper (1959) rejected the notion of the universal statement to be the bases for empirical sciences (as cited in Schick, 2000). It seems that the induction methodology has weak justifications to its perception regarding science and pseudoscience. However, logical reasoning in deduction methodology provides a better and strong approach to develop scientific theory.…

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Philosopher Karl Popper suggested that it is impossible to prove a scientific theory true using induction, since it is hard to find evidence that will assure us that contrary evidence will not be traced. To argue this, Karl Popper suggested that proper science is accomplished by a method he referred to as deduction. Deduction involves the process of falsification. Falsification is a particular specialized aspect of hypothesis testing. The falsification process generally involves the process of stating some output from a particular theory form and then researching using conflicting or incompatible cases using experiments or observations.…

    • 1356 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Scientists still praise Popper because of his belief that scientific theories should be constantly tested. All theories are tested and the results are analyzed by the scientific community in order to determine whether the results can be trusted or not. Some scientists believe that theories can never truly be proven but testing is necessary in order to differentiate between incorrect theories and theories that do a better job at explaining physical phenomena. According to some, a theory cannot explain the truth behind phenomena but it can highlight a…

    • 1594 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Philosophers continue to revisit these ideas, supporting their initial claims and making counter arguments to rebuttals. While realism supports the idea that science is based on facts and the truth, using scientific theories to accurately depict the world, anti-realism claims that the purpose of science is to find theories that are empirically correct due to one’s own observations of the physical world. Ultimately, the debate of realism and anti-realism concern the aim of science, trying to discover why scientists perform certain actions opposed to others as a result of their individual beliefs. It comprises of the nature of scientific knowledge, how we can attain and are limited by it, and the overall interpretation of the scientific enterprise. Inconsistencies can be highlighted in both arguments, however, both embrace a certain truth if observed through an unbiased perspective.…

    • 1509 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The most noticeable differences between science and pseudo-science are whether or not the theory has the ability to be scientifically tested. Non-science is evidently not in the domain of science. Some examples could be the disciplines of history or the theory of ethics/morality. As distinguished earlier, there may be 3 main reactions if a scientific justification conflicts with a pseudo/non-scientific justification. But there is no all-encompassing answer that says whether we should completely support the scientific justification or the non-scientific justification, under the circumstances of each independent case.…

    • 1344 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Baum And Behaviorism

    • 893 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The problems with Watson’s behaviorism were related to the struggle in defining his scientific explanatory terms. Skinner addressed these problems by developing the terms Watson created in order to prove the true meaning of these words via science. What are free will and determinism? How have some tried to make them compatible? Free will is the power people have to make their own choices and determine their own actions.…

    • 893 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    First he posits the argument that the “diverse phenomena” referenced in the new proposition are not all that diverse. Apparent diversity, is the result of diverse areas of science, however, the diversity in the science as a discipline doesn’t necessitate diversity in theories. Philosopher of science Carl Hempel, eloquently describes universal characteristics in theory testing: “The formulation of a theory will require the specification of two kinds of principles; let us call them internal principles and bridge principles for short. The former will characterize the basic entities and processes invoked by the theory and the laws to which they are assumed to conform. The latter will indicate how the processes envisaged by the theory are related to empirical phenomena with which we are already acquainted, and which the theory may then explain, predict, or retrodict.” (Philosophy of Natural Science pp.…

    • 811 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    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.…

    • 876 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    What is Science? Science is an orderly and sensible methodology to finding how a thing in the world works. Although, individual’s beliefs can affect coming up with theories, Science is based on facts, not opinion or preferences. So who are scientists? Firstly, the primary part of a scientist is to make new revelations that will propel human learning by studying and observing the scientific method to collect evidence in an experiment related to their hypothesis, hoping that they will come up with a theory with the results.…

    • 1139 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays