The Two Science
Hola Guys!
Good to see you again. In Today’s blog, we will discuss Science. And try to find whether its truth or Myth.
The content of the Blog will be as follows:
- The Division in Scientific Community
- Discussion on Science
The Division in Scientific Community
The study of nature through experiments and reasoning is called Science. Science is considered as the best way to describe nature and its happening. Also, Philosophy is not far behind. I will write a different blog about Philosophy a little later. Till then, stay with Science.
The Scientific Community compromises of two-division, they have their ways to do Science. And both the ways are interdependent.
- Saving the phenomena: For various centuries we have documented the occurring in Nature. Form this Documentation, we derived various laws and principles of Nature. Saving the phenomena helps us in making predictions, formulating laws and verifying them. The value of error in this mode of science completely depends on measuring instruments. Our advancements of measuring instruments led to various discoveries. Like Electron Microscope was like a Boon for the Biologists. However certain fields don’t require measuring instruments to quantify them, Mathematics is the best example. And that is our second mode of doing Science.
- Reasoning the phenomena: Solely Saving the phenomena, doesn’t answer our question to Why?. To describe why certain things happened, we need to make sense of the Saved equation we got. Now first we get the numbers and then we try to make a sense out of it. And here the value of error is due to the limitation of Human Mind to reason things. A few centuries back we believed that Earth is the centre of the Universe and supported it with the Saved Data by astronomers. But someone reasoned over it and formulated a more accurate model of Solar System. And that’s were reasoning and answering the Why helps in doing Science.
These two communities or modes are important for the development of a Scientific Argument. As an Argument must have supporting information along with a logical explanation of that information. Anyone of them solely is not enough to develop a Scientific argument in Modern World.
Discussion on Science
Science tries to explain everything about nature with help of very trivial arguments. And these arguments are based on their accuracy in the real world. Now here the Real World, is the world which we perceive and observe. Anything which we can’t observe, we can’t make accurate arguments about it. Earlier we used to believe in Ether as the rarefied element fill the upper regions of space. And the scientific community proposed various arguments supporting it but none of them validates its existence. Now we all know that Ether was a Hoax. But in the present world also there are various elements of interest just supported by arguments, not validated.
In future electrons may become obsolete and a new definition of an element will be made. Such discoveries can change the whole discussions in the scientific community.
Till then, Good Luck
