Navigating the Complexities: Science’s Epistemological, Metaphysical, and Ethical Challenges
Problems of Science
Epistemological Problems (Knowledge)
1. Affirming the Consequent
If the hypothesis (H) is true, then certain things happen (C). For example, if it rains (H), the streets are wet (C). If the streets are wet (C), therefore the hypothesis is true (it has rained). This is false because streets can be wet for other reasons.
Therefore, if we have a scientific law and observe the consequent, the antecedent must be true.
2. Verification and Falsification
This applies to universal laws, probabilistic laws, and negative individuals. Experimental verification of scientific laws is highly problematic, as it is not always possible.
Universal Laws
All S are P (e.g., all bodies are heavy). Verification is impossible because we can never observe all cases. Falsification is possible with just one counterexample.
Probabilistic Laws
a% of S are P. Verification is impossible because we cannot verify a sufficient number of cases. Falsification is also impossible for the same reason.
Laws Regarding Negative Individuals
There is no S that is P (e.g., there is no proton in that atom). Verification is possible by checking one body. Falsification is impossible because we cannot check all possible cases.
If scientific laws are not experientially verifiable under the proposed conditions, why do we maintain them?
- Past experiences provide evidence that events have occurred as stated in the law.
- We expect nature to continue acting the same way as in the past, present, and future.
3. The Laws
Scientific laws explain facts by presenting them ideally, as ideal models, apart from actual conditions that might disrupt the variables’ results.
4. Objectivity in Scientific Investigation
Scientists are supposed to investigate objectively, setting aside their prejudices when analyzing phenomena to establish laws. However, this is often impossible.
Metaphysical Problems (Reality)
- Reality is analyzed as if it is equivalent to nature explained by scientific laws, but there is no evidence that it is even reducible, and in fact, it is not.
- Experimental facts are studied by science, but natural beings also perform actions that cannot be explained by them. Therefore, it is not possible to argue that reality is explainable solely through science.
- Natural events are never repeatable under the exact same conditions. It is impossible to have all variables with identical values. That is why we seek ideal conditions for experimentation. Science cannot defend its universality in absolute terms because we never get identical values when applying a law multiple times to explain the same phenomenon. There is always a margin of error that increases with each repetition.
Ethical Issues
Science and Truth
Scientists may prioritize their philosophical, political, or religious convictions over well-proven scientific theories, deceiving themselves. Science, as a method of knowledge, requires experimental evidence and is capable of debugging both fraud and self-deceptions, but it is not immune to failure.
Scientific Interest
Why do we investigate? There is a tendency to marginalize primary research with medium- or long-term practical impacts. This hinders the development of science and, eventually, practical discoveries, because these discoveries rely on foundational research.
Research tends to focus on issues affecting “rich” people who fund research (when public) and can buy products resulting from private research. The problems of the poorest in the world are subjected to scientific research marginally.
Science Experimentation
Experimentation requires control of the experienced reality. This raises the question of whether the outcomes justify the investment and the ecological impact.
Are we authorized to experiment with animals and people? It is essential when there is a reasonable likelihood of success with the least possible damage, and in the case of individuals, with their consent.
Science, Technology, and Progress
Science and technology can offer us tremendous knowledge and control of nature and of man. But does scientific and technological progress equate to human progress?