Understanding Truth, Knowledge, and the Scientific Method
Criteria to Recognize Truth
1.1 When there is clear knowledge that prevents us from certainty to doubt its truth. This feeling of certainty and security that comes with evidence is a mental state and, therefore, somewhat subjective. Thus, it is not a satisfactory criterion.
1.2 Intersubjective knowledge is objective and shared by all, not exclusive to a particular person. Regarding the criteria of evidence, it has the advantage of relying on the recognition of many, but there is no guarantee of success. Truth requires community consensus, but even consensus does not mean the truth is undeniable.
Limits of Knowledge
2.1 The Possibility of Knowledge
- Dogmatism: The philosophical position that we can acquire universal and secure knowledge, and have absolute certainty. It defends the possibility of progressively and continuously expanding our knowledge.
- Skepticism: The position opposed to dogmatism. Moderate skepticism allows for doubt about firm and sure knowledge. Radical skepticism denies the possibility of even this knowledge.
- Criticism: A position halfway between dogmatism and skepticism. For critical thinkers like Kant, knowledge is possible, but not unquestionable and final; it must be continually reviewed and criticized to detect falsifications and errors.
- Relativism: The position that denies the existence of absolute truth, valid in itself anytime, anywhere. It believes that only individual opinions exist and are valid within a particular social, cultural, and historical context.
- Perspectivism: Does not deny the theoretical possibility of absolute truth, but acknowledges that each individual or group has a partial view of reality. Therefore, all perspectives of truth are true, and their meeting would constitute absolute truth.
2.2 The Conquest of Truth: A Collective Task
The conquest of truth involves a continuous effort in two directions: overcoming ignorance by increasing knowledge through study and research, and overcoming error by criticizing false knowledge and ideology. This dual task must be undertaken permanently and collectively.
Specificity of Scientific Knowledge
Science aims for a systematic explanation of everything that exists, differing from other forms of knowledge by its method. Neutrality, absence of prejudice, and critical intersubjective character are considered essential traits.
1.1 Origins of Science
Science arose when humans believed that natural phenomena could be integrated into an orderly and coherent system. Science and philosophy were initially indistinguishable. However, science became independent of philosophy and developed its own methods during the Scientific Revolution.
1.2 Specific Characteristics
- Experimentation: Galileo realized that some assumptions were not observable in everyday life. He created ideal situations, eliminating disturbing elements like friction, to compare them.
- Mathematization: Galileo maintained that nature responds to regularities expressed by mathematical functions. Mathematization became a cornerstone of the new science, in contrast to earlier physics.
1.3 Classification of Sciences
- Formal Propositions: Deal with relationships between symbols. They have no empirical content and are based on internal coherence, not observation. Types include logic and mathematics.
- Empirical Propositions: Deal with events in the world and their relationships. They have empirical content from observation and experience. Subtypes include:
- Natural: Dealing with natural reality.
- Social or Human: Dealing with the social and human aspects.
The Scientific Method and Its Limits
2.1 The Scientific Language
Science creates an artificial language for objectivity and accuracy:
- Concepts: Specific terms in science.
- Qualifiers: Organize reality into sets or groups.
- Comparatives: Order objects gradually.
- Metrics: Measure properties numerically.
- Laws: Basic sets of scientific knowledge, using precisely defined concepts to determine regularities of nature.
- Theories: Interconnected scientific laws forming compact, coherent, and systematic systems.
2.2 The Scientific Explanation
A scientific explanation responds to a particular event. Types include:
- Deductive Explanation: Based on logical deduction to reach a conclusion matching the phenomenon.
- Probabilistic Explanation: Based on several deductive explanations, with only one being certain, based on a probability of success.
- Teleological Explanation: Based on facts or historical information, but not provable with certainty.
- Genetic Explanation: Typical of history, but also present in natural sciences.
2.3 The Scientific Method
A procedure with steps to achieve a purpose. Types include:
- Deductive Method: Extracts specific conclusions from general principles. If the data is true, the conclusion is too.
- Inductive Method: Draws general conclusions from particular facts. Provides general laws but only offers probability, not certainty.
- Hypothetico-Deductive Method: Combines induction and deduction. Steps include:
- Defining the Problem: Identifying a problematic situation.
- Formulating a Hypothesis: Proposing a consistent solution.
- Deducing Consequences: Extracting consequences if the hypothesis is true.
- Verifying the Hypothesis: Checking if the consequences occur.
- Refuting the Hypothesis: Rejecting the hypothesis if consequences don’t occur.
- Confirming the Hypothesis: Confirming the hypothesis if consequences are met.
- Getting Results: Creating a new law or theory, or confirming an existing one.
2.4 Progress and Limits of Science
Scientism considers science the most perfect achievement of human rationality, ensuring indefinite progress. Key views include:
- Karl Popper: Continuous Progress: Falsified theories are replaced by better ones, closer to the truth.
- Thomas Kuhn: Scientific Revolutions: Paradigms have anomalies that can lead to crises and paradigm shifts.
We must reject naive scientism but avoid relativism and skepticism that question all scientific findings.
The Social Dimension of Science
3.1 The Institutionalization of Science
Collective knowledge is what a society understands as true at a given time. It is more decisive than personal knowledge, allowing for constant development without needing personal verification. Science is not infallible; several factors influence it:
- Political and economic institutions, subsidies, and patronage.
- Economic and social priorities determine research objectives.
- An international scientific community shares research globally.
- Comprehensive disclosure of research has made science more accessible.
These factors lead to the institutionalization of science. Technology’s great leap occurred when it turned to science. Scientific advances are exploited by technology, and current research relies on technological resources.