What is the nature of truth?

Is Our Universe Real? “The Philosophy of Science”

To begin to investigate some of the great philosophical questions that are seen never to be solved a model defining the aspects of The philosophy of science is used to explain, “Is our universe real?”  in its simplest form.

Image

Is Our Universe Real?

Epistemology – branch of philosophy that deals with what knowledge is, how we come to accept some things as true, and how we justify that acceptance.

Epistemology basically means “theory of knowledge” in particular the possibilities and limits of human knowledge.

What is knowledge? Which can be maintained by a relationship between reality and the mind factors that would include observational, experience or experiment and must be products of the reasoning mind of our reality.

The Foundation of Scientific Method are logical Reality Checks in observational reasoning of the mind of our reality. You can understand and enjoy the adventure of science, because the thinking used in science is not strange and mysterious, it’s the same thinking you use in daily life. In scientific logic, as in daily life, you use reality checks to decide whether “the way you think the world is” matches “the way the world really is.”

This may be seen when OBSERVATIONS (from an EXPERIMENT) and PREDICTIONS (based on a Theory) are compared in a REALITY CHECK that is a test of quality for a Theory.

A theory is a human attempt to describe and/or explain our observations of what happens, or (in historical science) what has happened.  A descriptive theory claims only to describe what happens.  An explanatory theory claims to describe what happens and also why it happens.

The notion of “reality” is inextricably linked to the subjectivity of individual human existence. As such, “reality” is viewed differently by each individual, through the filter of his/her personal circumstances, values and emotions. In addition to this, “reality” is determined through a combination of other factors and perspectives otherwise known as EXPERIENCE.

Our sense of reality of our individual experience is shaped from a multitude of sources some include;

Science – where reality is perceived according to what is factual or demonstrable.
Religion – where reality is considered according to “dogma” (doctrine).
History – where reality is considered according to human development – this also applies on a personal level in terms of an individual’s history.
Psychology – where reality is viewed in relation to theory and research.

It is how the relationship between the mind and the rest of reality is understood. From epistemology means this relationship would affirm our universe as being true or real as it may be justified through our senses of smell, feel, sound, vision and tastes for our theory of knowledge.

Image

For the average person, common sense says that there is a real world of perceivable objects. These objects can be analyzed and understood with a high degree of accuracy. 

Image

Philosophers have not been able to let the matter rest there. Plato taught that the real world consisted of universal ideas. The world that people actually see is given form by these ideas and is thus less real because it is always changing, but the ideas are eternal and unchangeable.

Metaphysics is concerned with the principles, structures, and meanings that underlie all observable reality. It is the investigation, by means of pure speculation, of the nature of being of the cause, substance, and purpose of everything. Metaphysics asks such questions such as:

What are space and time?

What is a thing and how does it differ from an idea?

Are humans free to decide their fate?

Is there a first cause, or God, that has made everything and put it in motion?.

In philosophy, the study of knowledge however amongst various cultures will derive far different answers, the three essential questions of any culture’s epistemology include the following:

1) What can I know?  
2) How do I know?  
3) How can I know if I know?

Empiricism – set of philosophical approaches to building knowledge that emphasizes the importance of observable evidence from the natural world. The purpose is to define the relationship between the senses and an external physical universe.

The key concept to be subjected is Faith Vs Reason? What is the nature of truth?

“I believe in evidence. I believe in observation, measurement, and reasoning, confirmed by independent observers. I’ll believe anything, no matter how wild and ridiculous, if there is evidence for it. The wilder and more ridiculous something is, however, the firmer and more solid the evidence will have to be.” – Isaac Asimov

Induction – method of reasoning in which a generalization is argued to be true based on individual examples that seem to fit with that generalization. For example, after observing that trees, bacteria, sea anemones, fruit flies, and humans have cells, one might inductively infer that all organisms have cells.

“Reality cannot be found except in One single source, because of the interconnection of all things with one another.” –  (Leibniz, 1670)

Deduction – method of reasoning in which a conclusion is logically reached from premises. For example, if we know the current relative positions of the moon, sun, and Earth, as well as exactly how these move with respect to one another, we can deduce the date and location of the next solar eclipse.

“There are cycles in everything. There are cycles in the weather, the economy, the sun, wars, geological formations, atomic vibrations, climate, human moods, the motions of the planets, populations of animals, the occurrence of diseases, the prices of commodities and shares and the large scale structure of the universe. None of these are independent of each other. Research shows that very different disciplines often find the same cycle periods in their data. The inter-relatedness of all things is an idea whose time has come. The study of cycles is an excellent way to understand this because the periods of cycles are as easy to recognise as fingerprints or DNA sequences.” – (Ray Tomes)

Parsimony/Occam’s razor – idea that, all other things being equal, we should prefer a simpler explanation over a more complex one.

“What is the Most Simple Science Theory of Reality?”

Occam’s Razor is now usually stated as follows:

“Of two equivalent theories or explanations, all other things being equal, the simpler one is to be preferred.”

As this is ambiguous, Isaac Newton’s version may be better:

“We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.” (Sir Isaac Newton, Principia: The system of the world).

Demarcation problem – the problem of reliably distinguishing science from nonscience  Modern philosophers of science largely agree that there is no single, simple criterion that can be used to demarcate the boundaries of science.

“Superstition? Who can define the boundary line between the superstition of yesterday and the scientific fact of tomorrow?”Garrett Fort, American writer.

What is science? What is religion? How do the two intersect? Historians of science address these questions by analyzing how the scientific and religious beliefs of particular scientists or cultures have interacted at specific times. Philosophers of science and religion, however, have sought to characterize the relationship between them in more general terms. Their endeavor has required defining science and religion in order to distinguish or “demarcate” them from each other by clear and objective criteria. During modern times, theologians and philosophers of science have attempted to make categorical demarcations between science and religion on various definitional grounds.

Falsification – the view, associated with philosopher Karl Popper, that evidence can only be used to rule out ideas, not to support them. Popper proposed that scientific ideas can only be tested through falsification, never through a search for supporting evidence.

Many theories have been put forth to explain the apparently “fine-tuned” constants. Most of these involve the notion that the constants were accidentally specified, typically within the context of a multiverse. These models are often criticized for being unverifiable and, therefore, speculative. They are also supposedly non falsifiable  However, if the constants were accidentally specified, then physically significant, dimensionless ratios would likely have random values; we would not expect to find that they involve any mathematical pattern. But there may be such a pattern. Hence, the constants would not have been accidentally specified, and this would falsify all scenarios invoking an accidental origin for the universe.

Paradigm shifts and scientific revolutions – a view of science, associated with philosopher Thomas Kuhn, which suggests that the history of science can be divided up into times of normal science (when scientists add to, elaborate on, and work with a central, accepted scientific theory) and briefer periods of revolutionary science. Kuhn asserted that during times of revolutionary science, anomalies refuting the accepted theory have built up to such a point that the old theory is broken down and a new one is built to take its place in a so-called “paradigm shift.”

SOME IMPORTANT SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS OR PARADIGM SHIFTS TIME
MATHEMATICS, ASTRONOMY, PHYSICS, GEOLOGY, CHEMISTRY, BIOLOGY, MEDICINE;

Antiquity to 1400s Theory of a Spherical Earth
Early 1500s Heliocentric Theory of Solar System (Copernicus, Brahe, Kepler)
Mid 1600s Corpuscular Theory of Light and Optics (Newton) Theory of Blood Circulation (Harvey)
Mid 1600s Theory of Motion and Mechanics (Newton) Cellular Theory of Biological Structure (Leeuwenhoek, Hooke,)
Mid 1700s Oxygen Theory of Combustion (Lavoisier)
Mid 1700s Theory of Gases, (Boyle, Charles, Cavendish, Lavoisier) Species Concept in Biology (Linnaeus)
Late 1700s Theory of Static Electricity (Franklin) Theory of Gaseous Chemical Elements (Dalton, Lavoisier)
Early 1800s Theory of Heat and Thermodynamics (Rumford, Carnot, Joule,) Theory of Metallic Elements (Davy, )
Early 1800s Theory of Current Electricity and Electrochemistry (Galvanic, Coulomb, Faraday) Uniformitarian Theory of Geology (Hutton, Lyell) Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection (Darwin, Wallace, Huxley)
Late 1800s Electromagnetic Wave Theory of Light (Clerk-Maxwell) Periodic Theory of All Elements (Mendeleev) Bacterial Theory of Disease (Koch, Pasteur, )
Late 1800s Quantum Theory of Radiation (Planck) Theory of Recent Ice Ages (Agassiz)
Late 1800s Sub-Atomic Particle Theory of Matter (Thompson)
Early 1900s Theory of General Relativity (Einstein) Isotopic Theory of All Elements (Moseley, Aston) Theory of Genetic Inheritance, (Mendel, De Vries, Bateson)
Early 1900s Theory of Galactic Dimensions (Hubble) Theory of Blood Groups (Landsteiner)
Mid 1900s Theory of Expanding Universe (Hubble) Theory of Continental Drift and Plate Tectonics (Wegener) Theory of DNA Coding (Crick, Watson, Franklin)
Mid 1900s Theory of Gravitational Collapse ( )

Three Characteristics of Scientific Revolutions:

(1) The community’s rejection of one time-honored scientific theory in favor of another incompatible with it.

(2) A shift in the problems available for scientific scrutiny and the standards by which solutions should count as admissible or legitimate.

(3) A transformation in scientific imagination on how scientific work was done.

Such changes, together with the controversies that always accompany them, are the defining characteristics of scientific revolutions.

Advertisements

59 responses to “What is the nature of truth?

  1. Pingback: kulki proteinowe·

  2. Pingback: Szafy metalowe·

  3. Pingback: bateria do laptopa fujitsu siemens·

  4. Pingback: assurance temporaire·

  5. Pingback: assurance temporaire·

  6. Pingback: wypozyczalnia busow·

  7. Pingback: sell your bitcoin·

  8. Pingback: tutaj·

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s