What is truth?

Learning to think scientifically is quite a rigid point of view, if we encounter a problem of knowledge, say in understanding the way in which the universe began, then if only scientific methods are followed and still no conclusion can be reached how would be ever discover it, we need often to think differently in order to advance our knowledge. ing except for themselves the truth, and nobody is hurt by this Until somebody tries to prove them wrong and wars occur.

The essay title poses the question “do we need to learn to think scientifically in order to find the truth?” How though do we learn? And more to the point how de we learn to think scientifically? I might never learn to think scientifically and then how would I ever know what it is to think scientifically, that would be saying that everything I have ever learnt is untrue, but surely just learning these incorrect things shows me that they are true in some way because I have learnt them and if I hadn’t then how could I of?

I would define “thinking scientifically” as trying to understand, how though could I understand why a symphony by Bach or a painting by Michaelangelo is beautiful, beautiful is a perception and up until now there is no way of measuring perception.

Has anybody ever seen quantified beauty? Is there anyway of measuring beauty other than our own personal opinions, our opinions of course could help to quantify such intangible things such as beauty but we all think differently, if everybody on the planet had the same opinion on something then we would be able to look at it and say “that’s why we like that”, but there’s always an exception to the rule. uk

What this means is that if I was to tell you every day for a year that the moon was really a banana then you would believe me, so if I was a scientist and through my measurements I found a comet that would hit earth in 2 years time and I could prove it then people would believe me, so why did people so believe Nastradamus when he said that the world would end, he had no proof wasn’t even here to back up his claims himself.

This essay has raised many questions in my mind about the universe and humans, how we think, why we think and what truth really is, but the essay question asks the question “do we need to learn to think scientifically in order to find the truth?” in answer to this question I conclude yes and no, I think it depends on what you are inquiring about, if for instance I make the statement; “I find the colour purple fascinating”, did I think scientifically to come to this conclusion, no I didn’t but that is not to say that my way of thinking is not scientific to somebody else, my way of thinking leads me too my truth, thinking scientifically can only answer questions that are in some way measurable and if a question is asked that requires one to quantify beauty then the answer will surely be derived from unscientific, rather, emotive, perceptive thinking. This is a good example for the quote from Lenin.

If we can now cast our minds back to the original question that I posed at the beginning of the essay; “what is truth”, I don’t believe that anybody can answer that question, we all have our own version of truth because we can never ever see things from exactly the same perspective as somebody else, and even if you could see from somebody else’s perspective, how would you know, truth is inquantifiable and therefore a wholly unscientific thing, so if truth its self is unscientific then why would we need to think scientifically in order to find truth. Truth is a tricky thing, anything could be true, but then somebody else will find something that says that something else is wrong which makes the original thing wrong…good examples of this can be found in science, physics underwent massive changes at the beginning of the previous century, old theories were proved incorrect and new theories moved in to take there place, one of the scientists that spearheaded the scientific revolution was Max Planck;

"A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. Learning is merely the intake of knowledge, understanding is the really important process, if I could learn Einstein’s theories relativity then that’s just wonderful, but what is the point in learning it if you can’t understand it;

“Much learning does not teach understanding. Take Quantum physics for example, people previously believed that the atom could be described in terms of the solar system, with the nucleus in the middle as the sun and the neutrons and electrons orbiting around it, but now it is thought that it is impossible to actually pinpoint the orbiting electrons, only say where they might be through a serious of probabilities, in effect then they could be everywhere at the same time.