Natural Science and History: Methods and Problems
Natural Science: The Scientific Method
The sciences that study physical reality are very varied. Some merely observe, describe, and classify things. Their criterion of truth is the precise fit to the object studied. Others want to know the laws governing phenomena and the internal structure of things. They follow the hypothetical-deductive method:
- Discovery of a problem.
- Invention of a hypothesis.
- Formulation of the hypothesis.
- Contrasting the hypothesis.
When the hypothesis is sufficiently corroborated by evidence, it becomes a law or theory. In life, we all follow a similar process. In scientific practice, formulating a hypothesis and testing it is a normal procedure.
Criteria of Truth
Science is not infallible. It elaborates hypotheses, not explanations, which are tested. In the process of contrasting and subjecting them to the criteria of truth, their strength will be corroborated. The more criteria met, the stronger the hypothesis will be. The main criteria to be fulfilled are:
- Consistency: A theory must have internal and external consistency.
- Method and Control: Evidence is stronger when strictly controlled perceptually. Rigorous and methodical observation is stronger than observation without a method.
- Experimentation: A theory has more strength as it has been proven through repeated and varied experiments that can be replicated.
- Falsifiability: Evidence is stronger when produced by an experiment that *denies* a hypothesis, rather than by many experiences that confirm it. Only when it exceeds tests of falsifiability does it acquire true strength.
- Prediction: A theory is corroborated when it predicts phenomena, or when any of the practical consequences resulting from it succeed.
Meeting these criteria does not absolutely guarantee the truth of a theory, but the strength of the evidence obtained can be considered justification for its acceptance. Consensus is *not* a criterion of truth.
History and its Problems
As an example of social sciences, that is, of sciences that have humanity as a protagonist, we focus on history. This raises questions not only philosophical, but also political and ethical, studying natural sciences. Natural science systems are governed by strict laws. Humans have a component of freedom that makes many behaviors unpredictable. In addition, in the case of historical events, we cannot repeat them to check their causes. It is common to talk about “strong or hard” sciences and “weak or soft” sciences; however, the social sciences study critically important issues for humans. Solving how historical events “fact” is one of the tasks of historical science.
Objectives of History
History has the following objectives regarding past events:
- Describing: Objectively and impartially.
- Understanding: Including within a model of motivations, desires, and purposes.
- Submitting an interpretation hypothesis: To see if there are laws governing historical events.
What is true in history is a current, cutting-edge topic, and all historians have a certain degree of arbitrariness that they try to mitigate. Historical facts can be interpreted differently and can be used with special interests, not scientific ones. History must submit these versions to a rigorous critique to test the strength of their evidence. History should also avoid ethnocentrism, that is, a perspective centered on one culture. Kant called for “a universal history of cosmopolitan character,” that is, one that recognizes the importance of what happens in all countries of the world.
Historical Method
History is based on the critical study of sources. It has the help of many complementary sciences. This allows statements about facts to be evidence-based. The method used is called hermeneutics, which is the science of interpretation.