Do We Have to Think Scientifically in order to find the trut

Topic: Do we have to learn to think scientifically in order to find the truth?

First we have to understand that there are different truths: personal, relative and absolute. The absolute Truth is the truth that different societies accepts, whereas personal truth depends on one individual only and what is truth for them. The relative truth is very dependent on the subject, argument, people who have different ideas.

So what does ‘thinking scientifically’ means? It is a process of questioning that generate new hypotheses, new experiments. Firstly there is the question that comes with hypothesis ( this is the prediction of what might happen) that is then testified by observations, experiments. If at least once the hypothesis proves to be wrong then it will be falsify. According to Popper first scientists use intuition to create ahead of facts, to frame hypotheses. Then these hypotheses tested “DEDUCTIVELY”(hypothesis is taken for the moment as truth). In the end we cannot be sure is what we proven correct because of the uncertainty inherent in induction, but they can be falsified. Scientists only accept those statements that haven’t been falsified yet. Example of scientific truth that was later shown to be incorrect is take

. . .

View the whole essay, without interruption

In our TOK class we did an experiment. But the actual meaning and actions they take are similar. Different example can be brought up, about a man from India who believed that snake cause earthquake#. On map you may not see the secret FBI building but it may be standing somewhere and not put on any map at all. One group of Ukrainian society calls them Mafia and other simply Deputy of ‘Verhovna Rada‘#. The example of man who saw things differently from what we expect, he couldn’t see faces of people, so the visual truth can also vary. Gause’s law - no two species are ever in direct competition in the same ecological niche, this law now considered to be incorrect because recent studies have indicated that there must be coexistence over time. So inductive generalization can have new resource/evidence/data that may change the statement, therefore it can never be certain. Past comes to us as stories and that we cannot get out of them to check if they correspond to the real past, because these “always ready” narratives constitute truth.

Another truth is linguistic truth. Every historian subtracting and in some cases adding things to or from the actual event in the past. Popper named this difference as “criterion of demarcation”.

Art is another example where personal truth figures in.

Approximate Word count = 1382
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)

Simply subscribe to view this paper, and 100,000 others.