Should We Trust the Scientific Method?
Should We Trust the Scientific Method?--A Science Treatise
George E.P. Box
once said, “All models are wrong, but some are useful”. The scientific method
is a model that has been used for approximately 2,300 years.[1]
Countless scientists have used this method in attempts to prove their
hypotheses and theories. Many scientists still use this method today, and it is
even taught in schools. This method has essentially been accepted in society as
the method of scientific success.
Considering these factors, I see a question that is essential to the future of
science: should we trust the scientific method? The scientific method should
not only be trusted, but accepted and used in society. The scientific
method is reliable and useful for three main reasons: first, the scientific method has worked in the
past. We can only know the key to success in the future if we look to the
past. Second: the scientific method
offers a clear outline for gathering evidence and data. Evidence and data
are essential in proving a hypothesis, and the scientific method makes it
easier for evidence and data to be collected. Lastly, the scientific method offers opportunities for asking questions and for
experimentation. A theory starts with a question, and experimentation is
necessary in gathering evidence and data. The scientific method is built around
hypotheses,[2]
and hypotheses start as questions. Using the scientific method is vital to the
future of science, and if we don’t understand how important the method is, then
it will be much harder to prove our theories and hypotheses about the world around
us. If we can’t prove our theories, then our problems can’t be solved.[3]
The
scientific method is reliable because it has worked in the past. Obviously,
one of the biggest ways that we can know that something works is by seeing if
it has worked in the past. Many examples of the scientific method being put to
use are found in past theories. Alfred Wegener is a great example of the
scientific method working in the past. Wegener is often considered the father
of continental drift. Throughout all of Wegener’s writings, we see that this
whole theory started with a question being asked.[4]
“Why does it appear as if the South American and African continents would fit
together like a jigsaw puzzle?” Wegener may have asked himself to begin his
theory. Curiosity obviously sparked this question, and curiosity is a basic
value of any scientist who uses the scientific method. Wegener went on to begin
to collect evidence for his hypothesis. He went to different continents,
observed the composition of earth and the fossils on each one, and experimented
to find out how his evidence fit together and how it applied to his hypothesis.
This is obvious proof of the scientific method being used. Wegener’s hypothesis
was eventually developed into the theory of plate tectonics, and it is now
accepted among scientists in the world today. This is an evident example of
the scientific method being used and being proved successful in the past.
The
scientific method is reliable because it offers a clear outline for gathering
evidence and data. It is impossible to further prove a hypothesis or theory
without evidence or data. For example, Alfred Wegener couldn’t have contributed
to the theory of plate tectonics without going to different continents and
gathering evidence to support that theory. Considering this, we must remember
that the scientific method is reliable outline for gathering evidence and data.
If this can be proved, then we will be one step closer to proving that the
scientific method is reliable. In order to see this outline in the scientific
method, we must first explore this question: what is the scientific method? The
scientific method is a process of asking questions, making predictions, experimenting,
and observing.[5]
This offers an outline for collecting evidence and data because evidence and
data can only be collected through experimentation and observation. For
example, Alfred Wegener collected samples of earth on opposite continents and
experimented, compared, and observed those samples of earth. Only through this
process was Wegener able to collect that evidence (or data) in order to further
prove his hypothesis. Since the scientific method is a series of experiments
and observations, and since experiments and observations lead to evidence and
data collection, then the scientific method is a clear outline for gathering
evidence and data.
The
scientific method is reliable because it offers opportunities for
experimentation and for asking questions. Experimentation and the asking of
questions are essential to science. How can we know that something is true if
we don’t test it? Why would someone test something if they weren’t curious? The
scientific method is experimentation
and the asking of questions, and these two steps are vital to discovering truth
in science and in life. Specifically, the aspect of asking questions and making
predictions before experimenting has been drastically underestimated.
Prediction is a very important step that must be taken before the
experimentation step. I talk of prediction because prediction and the asking of
questions are very closely connected, and they are even nearly identical. A
prediction is a question. For example, here is a prediction: “this rock’s streak
is blue”. This prediction is the same as a question: “is this rock’s streak
blue, or is it not blue?” The question in a prediction is whether that
prediction is true or false. It is important to know the connection between
predicting and asking a question so that we can recognize what predicting is.
This step of predicting must be done before experimentation so that the
experiment can be measured. If there is no prediction when an experiment is
being made, then there is no way to know what happened during that experiment.
For example, I can’t identify a rock’s streak unless I propose potential colors
for that rock’s streak. It will be much harder to identify the color of that
streak unless I say beforehand, “this rock’s streak is going to be blue and not
green, yellow, or red”. This is a huge reason why the scientific method is
reliable: prediction and experimentation are offered in the scientific method,
and prediction and experimentation are essential to discovering truth in
science and in the world.
It
is crucial to science to know whether or not the scientific method works, so
that we can know whether or not to use that method in science. We know that the
scientific method works for three reasons: first; the scientific method has worked in the past; second; the scientific method offers a clear
outline for gathering evidence and data; third; the scientific method offers opportunities for experimentation and for
asking questions. For these three reasons, the scientific method is
reliable, and it is vital to the future of science, therefore, it must be used.
Bibliography
1. Edmund, Norman. “Scientific Method History.” scientificmethod.com. 7 November, 2013
2. Anderson,
Chris. “The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete.”
Wired Magazine. 27 Jun, 2008 .
1 October, 2013 . <http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/16-07/pb_theory>
3. “Scientific
Method” Mississippi Archeology
Valley Center 1 October, 2013 . <http://www.uwlax.edu/mvac/processarch/processarch/prefield_scientific.html>
4. Waggoner,
Ben. “Alfred Wegener.” University
of California Museum
of Paleontology 9 July, 1996 . 14 November, 2013 . <http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/wegener.html>
5. Wudka, Jose. “What is ‘The Scientific
Method’?” 24 September, 1998 .
1 October, 2013 . <http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node6.html#SECTION02121000000000000000>
Should We Trust the Scientific Method?
![Should We Trust the Scientific Method?]()
Reviewed by IJ Pack
on
3:28 PM
Rating:
No comments