Journal Club -1. What makes Science a Science?

You are studying Science and have studied Science for at least 5 years now. When you turn up to a Science lesson how do you know it is Science you are studying? What makes it different to other subjects? For our first Journal Club, we will consider what makes Science a Science.

We are not going to look at a Journal (that will be next time), but I would like you all to listen to a Podcast. Before you listen to it please finish reading this blog! The Podcast is from Radio 4’s, ‘The Infinite Monkey Cage’ with Brian Cox and Robin Ince. The episode to listen to is Series 8, episode 4, What makes Science a Science?

Image-1

In order to help you get the most from this and facilitate discussion I have included some suggestions for you to consider and make notes on.

Before you start, write down your opinion on, what makes Science a Science?

  1. At the very beginning Brian Cox gives us his summary, what is it?
  2. From the list of subjects given, what do you consider to be science?
  3. Scientology and Homeopathy are mentioned, find out more about these.
  4. Each panel member gives us their view. Can you summarise their views and who do you agree / disagree with?
  5. Is the scientific way of looking at the world superior to other ways?
  6. What is the difference between objective versus subjective views or opinions?
  7. Is there one scientific method that can be applied to everything?
  8. In your opinion, what makes Science a Science? Has it changed?
  9. Finally the audience is asked, What do you want scientific proof of? – Be original with your own idea

Remember that this is just to aid discussion and frame your thoughts. You can follow all, some or none of this list. The point of this is to stimulate thought and share ideas so PLEASE POST YOUR THOUGHTS BELOW prior to our Journal Club meeting.

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “Journal Club -1. What makes Science a Science?

  1. Journal Club 1
    What makes science a science?
    I think it is the pursuit of knowledge of the universe we live in so we can understand why things are and what they are.
    Brian Cox initial statement- Careful observation and the application of common sense.
    He is basically saying that it is noticing the abnormal and using your judgement to figure out why it is what it is which can be true for some scientific discoveries in the past like Democritus, noticing that certain materials have different properties therefore the reason behind it is because their atoms are shaped in a specific way that creates this.
    Social Science- Yes because it is how and why humans interact with one another.
    Psychology- No because it doesn’t seek to answer questions about what thinking is.
    Sports Science- No because it doesn’t delve in to what is and why.
    Scientology- No since it is a belief/ church.
    Economics- No since it doesn’t seek to answer questions about what is and why it is.

    Dr Goldacre-It is the tools you use and not what you study. It is about testing a hypothesis and using your judgement to analyse evidence.
    Sophie Scott- It is about what you do when trying to find out about the world. Trying to define the properties of the world- not the truth but information.
    Evan Davis- It is about looking for explanations and curiousity when linking theories to the real world. It is a bout plausible story-telling and using your judgement to decide which variables you need to take into account.
    Brian Cox- It is about observing nature and removing the human element.
    Pseudoscience- A belief presented incorrectly as scientific and is also ineffective in treatment.
    Scientology- A cult/ religious movement which believes that people are immortal beings who have forgotten their true nature. They claim that psychiatry is destructive and abusive and must be abolished from society.
    Homeopathy- The belief that a substance which causes symptoms of a disease in healthy people can cure similar symptoms in unhealthy people. This is ‘like cures like’ and large scale studies have found this to be just as effective as the placebo effect.
    My new opinion on science
    I now think that science is the never ending search for the best answers to elements of the universe to which humans have not created.
    Scientific proof
    I would like scientific proof of the size of the universe or what is outside the universe if such a thing exists.

    Like

  2. What makes a science a science?
    For me, a science is a study of the universe and that which it contains by proposing hypotheses and carrying out experiments to provide data (mainly quantitative) as evidence to prove or disprove the initial hypothesis. In all, it is about finding out something new or correcting the knowledge we have about our universe. Brain Cox briefly summarises a science to be “careful observation and the application of common sense”.

    -Social science, no
    -Freudian Psychology, no
    -Sports Science, yes
    -Scientology, no
    -Economics, no
    -Judo, no

    Scientology – A collection of beliefs that aim to understand spiritual nature, one’s relationship with one’s: self, family, mankind and the universe.
    Homeopathy – A medical practice that uses natural substances to cure a variety of ailments or provide the symptoms of an ailment. It is claimed to encourage the body to heal itself.

    Ben Goldacre . . . It is about the tools one uses rather than the subject one is studying. It should be evidenced based and focused around a hypothesis. One needs to be clear on the aspirations of science and the reality of science. – I agree with most of what it is said but I disagree with the aspirations/reality of science. Personally, a science needs to be testing a real matter in the universe and what actually happens. But I think this needs to involve certain aspirations to achieve its great length. If scientists didn’t aspire, we wouldn’t have the depth of the subject and the create thinking that allow us to question our universe.
    Sophie Scott . . . It is a process to find out about the world and it the process that defines it. Science should be never ending research as things that are true may change based on what else is found out to be true. – I couldn’t disagree with anything said as it is well known that science is forever changing as we discover more. If something has an end point, it can’t really be a science as the community is forever finding out things that are wrong that were earlier perceived to not be that way.
    Evan Davis . . . It is the searching for the comprehendible explanation that is subject to the knowledge available at that time. One has to related ideas and theories to the real world. The result should be a subjective view of how the results interact with humans. – Again, I can agree with most of this description. A science is about explaining the unexplainable by connecting that which we can explain. Yet, as Brian Cox injects, the study for science itself should take an objective approach as what we do should interfere (or can’t) with the outcome. This is because if we can interfere with the results, by looking subjectively, we aren’t studying nature and the universe but more our effect on the happenings in the Universe – hence making Economics not a science.

    In some ways, the scientific way (here presuming objectively), is the superior way of looking at things as our interaction will have very little (if any) effect on the outcome of science in the big picture. If we can have an effect we aren’t studying science we are studying the effects of humans. However, when we are looking at other things (for example economics) the workings of money are affected individually by the human that is interfering as we each take a different approach. On a different level, the idea of a scientific approach can only be used in interaction with sufficient evidence, and works most effectively in an objective situation. In the scenarios the panel describe, the scientific method may not be the best as these are subject situations in which there are levels of variables that are all subjective thus the science doesn’t play out well with real life. In these times, some common sense should be applied as how we interact with the scenario depends on us as human beings. Although, the idea of science and finding and providing evidence seems the most fool proof method overall, some real life situations at complications that this method cannot cope with.

    Unless one is to use Feynman’s algorithm for solving problems, there is no clear methodology one should follow to complete a scientific problem. It is all dependant on the problem at hand, the equipment to be used, the known variables and the evidence we hold. For science itself, it should be about finding evidence (in a way suitable to that science) and combining the data with that of other scientists to from solutions that are explained and understandable – to a degree. However, as Ben says, sometimes not everything can be understood as we simply do not have all of the technology and information to gather the data; but when we can explain something, we should try to as science is never ending but there is a puzzle that is being solved and each bit of evidence could explain something different and unexpected. The pure method of evidence finding is the scientific method we need to apply. How that evidence ca be found, it is up to the scientist and the equipment and knowledge they have – that is the variability in the scientific method.

    A Science – The never ending objective study, using the tools of science, of an area of the universe. This is achieved by finding evidence, or as much as possible, and drawing in other evidence to disprove what currently believed and find out what is wrong. One poses a hypothesis to then test with data and evidence to explain the unexplainable with what we perceive to know from that which we found out.

    What do you want scientific proof of?
    • What is the conscience?

    Like

  3. What makes science a science?
    About the things you use rather than the research. All things can be argued for and against, it depends on what you think a science is.

    Has testing and hypothesis. Using evidence in order to prove a hypothesis. Being accurate/aiming to be accurate at what you are researching. A process which can be applied in order to find out about the world and rather than find out what is definite but what you know. Not finding the right answer but finding the least wrong answer. Not about truth but finding information, doesn’t have to be useful information.

    Not looking for information that has loopholes in it, finding the most plausible story that people can find acceptable. Observing nature in order to find theories. Doesn’t have to be the same every time, but more studying how variables affect each other/what the variables are. Looking at what is going on, but trying to find out what is affecting it. Often science will not be classed as the more difficult to determine/separate subjects despite the fact they are as they are bad scientists as it is more difficult to prove. A science will continue to work and be critical and demand evidence in order for it to develop.

    Does science get the respect it deserves; some scientific evidence can be misleading/may portray a bad influence. Just because it isn’t as dangerous doesn’t mean that it can be dangerous. Science doesn’t have to be common sense, but sometimes it has to be respected. Although it can be difficult, it should be attempted to use the best evidence that is available.

    Like

  4. Journal club-what makes science a science?

    First opinion on what makes a science a science:
    A science is a subject that investigates the attributes of the world so that we can fully understand and learn about the unknown anomalies of the things around us. On the one hand i think it is the discovery of knowledge of the universe and everything in it including ourselves from experiments lead by theories and observations. On the other hand i think a subject could be its own science in its self.

    1. Brian cox’s summary was that science is careful observation and the application of common sense.

    2. From the list of subjects i think that freudin psycology, sports science, social science are science subjects but i dont think scienctology and economics is a science.

    3. Scientology — the term means “the study of truth”. The group now claims 10 million members in 159 countries and more than 6,000 Scientology churches, missions and outreach groups across the globe. They frequently speak of “helping people,” and this mission is stressed in a number of church testaments. It supposedly a new kind of relegion drawing from past knowlege where people can particpate in whilst believing in it.
    http://www.scientology.org.uk/what-is-scientology/the-practice-of-scientology.html

    Homeopathy is a complementary or alternative medicine (CAM). It is a ‘treatment’ based on the use of highly diluted substances, which practitioners claim can cause the body to heal itself. A central principle of the “treatment” is that “like cures like” – that a substance that causes certain symptoms can also help to remove those symptoms. A second central principle is based around a process of dilution and shaking, called succussion. Practitioners believe that the more a substance is diluted in this way, the greater its power to treat symptoms. Many homeopathic remedies consist of substances that have been diluted many times in water until there is none or almost none of the original substance left. Homeopathy is used to “treat” an extremely wide range of conditions, including physical conditions such as asthma and psychological conditions such as depression

    4. Panels views
    Dr Ben Goldacre: “ Its about the tools you use and not the things you are studying”. Many people believe that they are doing science but arent. So people claim to be doing sciectific things but they are using the basis of science wrong such homeopathy. Also there needs to be more clarity in what science actually is than what the world wants it to be.
    Sophie Scott : “Science is a process, its a thing you do”. Science can be approached in many different things such as history or it can test to see if something works such as homeopathy. Domains that you wouldn’t expect can have elements of science in them. It is something that can help define the fundamentals of what you are analyzing. A science is a continuous cycle that may contradict earlier tnings that have been learnt which is why it will nevr end.
    Evan Davis: “Its about having a curiosity that relates ideas in the head or theories to the real world”. Its about having valuble versions of information that humans can believe so that they can understand the unknown and is linked with peoples prejudice thoughts or influenced views on data.
    I agree with sophie scott that science will never end and that their will be new things to discover in the future that may disprove information that has already been colleted and rresolved. An example of this the evolution of the structure of the atom. At first, it was said to be a solid sphere with no components which changed to having protons and electrons in the same location in the atom. And now it is said that in the centre of the atom there is a nucleaus containing protons and neutrons which is surrounded by orbiting electrons. This is just one of many reinforcments that suggests that you may not have learned everything to do with science which is also why i dont agree with Evan davis’s summary because science unlimited and is not about “story telling” but learning new things.

    5. I wouldn’t say the scientific way of looking at the world is the superior way but is in fact a powerful way. Especially by seeing the world through the different roots of science. This is becauase there are many aspects that the world is associated with but of which are not deemed sciectific such as looking at it through economics or relegion etc. I think its a powerful way because of how the world has eveolved around science and how humans react with indepth thinking when using it or even just thinking about.

    6. Subjective opinions are the interpretations of the person with their own emotions and judgment. It is often considered ill-suited for scenarios like news reporting or decision making in business or politics. Objective information or analysis is fact-based, measurable and observable.

    7. There could be a specific tool or tactic that could be applied to everything but i dont think it would need to be scientific as no one knows what everything is therefore we dont know if there is a scientific method for everything or if one is needed.

    8. My opinion on science itself has changed as well as what makes a science a science. When i first thought about the question i automatically thought about the subject of science of which i think others may have thought of as well. But now when i think of science, i think more outside the box because there is no boundaries to contain the contents of science which could mean that trying to define what science is would be indiscribable. In some way i agree that its the tools you use which is the science but also what you discover is also related to what science is. It is infinite.

    9. I want to know what the sciectific proof of a miracle is.

    Like

  5. What makes a science a science?
    By Emily Kirkham

    Before I listen to the pod cast, in my opinion, this question is very difficult to answer. It certainly cannot be defined in one word and perhaps not even a phrase. After a lot of thought I have decided that a science is a science because there is investigation, experiments, numerous tests, collecting data and trying to prove something to be true using evidence. However, thinking about certain non-science subjects could interlink with my description of what a science is. For example, History requires an element of investigation and trying to prove something. Therefore, I can conclude my definition isn’t very specific or definite.

    In the podcast, Brian Cox says that science is careful observation and the application of common sense. Meaning he believes science only requires looking carefully and thinking about it.

    According to me, Social science is not a science because it studies the human society, rather than the physical world. Although it studies the behavior of science through investigation, I do not consider it to be a science as a result of the lack of scientific equipment typically used in a lab. Also, there aren’t many scientific variables used, like in a science investigation. Perhaps there is a hypothesis, but there isn’t variables in the same way. Plus it doesn’t require any equations, sums e.c.t.

    Freudian psychology is also not a science as it studies the mind and personality resulting this. Although it says in the dictionary it’s the scientific study, I disagree and say it doesn’t require some science, like social science, but doesn’t use enough to actually become one.

    Sports Science is a science because it studies the body and how different movements enable out movements, how to ease pain e.c.t. Because it’s quite similar to biology in many aspects, I believe it is a science. It’s a very specific science in the sense that it only studies the body, rather than social science which can study numerous things.

    Scientology, despite sounding like it should be a science, is in face a cult religion formed in the early 1900’s. It has proven to brainwash followers to thrive and encourage the growth of the ‘religion’ particularly in the USA. Although using labs, it is far from a science.

    Economics is also not a science. It does use a lot of mathematics, which is a science, but the application alone doesn’t confirm it to be a science.

    Finally, Judo was put forward and I think it isn’t a science, it’s a sport with a certain degree of art to it.

    Some subjects seem to act a bit like sand. Sand is a solid. It’s made from a solid rock and the sand particles are definitely solid. However, it has certain characteristics like a liquid. It flows like one, it takes the shape of its container. Some could argue it is a liquid because of the basic principles. However, if you look deeper, into a more specific description of what a liquid has, it becomes clear sand simply cannot be a liquid.

    History requires investigation to argue something happened or didn’t happen but it doesn’t have the extra scientific research to change the planet we live on in a way that discovers new cures, new ideas on how the universe works, dark matter. It can tell us if an incident occurred at a certain time or place, but cannot explain it in a plausible way which isn’t considered a science.
    Like this controversial topic, they have brief, unclear definitions allowing subjects to then claim to meet the criteria. Despite this, they do not in fact meet them down to the key parts, which divide a humanity to a science. Subjects must hit every part of the principles to become a science, rather than hitting the basics on the surface of what a science is.

    Homeopathy is using medicine to treat patients, containing small doses of natural things, which in larger doses would create symptoms of the ailment. This is seen as a natural way of allowing the body to cure itself. An example is giving people cow pox so they became immune to small pox in the 14/15th century.

    Ben thought that science was a testable hypothesis with different tools and isn’t just the study. It’s also using evidence to create conclusions. I agree with this but think he has missed out some parts Sophie explains.

    She thinks that science is a process and is about applying, which can be done in anything. It’s also finding out about the world we live in, and other worlds. It helps define properties but is a continuing process. This I feel is the main difference between a humanities subject to a science. In Geography, a meander in a river is a bend in the river. There is no doubt about this. A comma in English does create a pause in the sentence. However, in science theories change all the time. They can be disproved, altered, abolished and be built on. Theories about atomic structure changed massively in the 1900’s due to advances in technology and investigation. Scientific theories are just there for the time. They can never be 100% right due to changes in the world and in life. Which is why she explains it better.

    There is and there isn’t a better scientific way of looking at the world as it’s all an opinion. Some could say it’s good to try and work backwards. Others would think satellites can capture pictures of the world. Other would say we need to take a psychology approach to find out who’s in the world. The best way is to all work together and collect evidence from many different sources, finding common things and using this t see the world deeper.

    A subjective view is a developed view, using an objective view (which is fact only). However, sometimes facts aren’t actually exactly how something is, and it can vary depending on where and who you are. There are anomalies and is always some improvement that can be made on the objective facts. However, a subjective view could be biased and not include the full picture.

    There is no single method that can applied, unless it’s impossibly simple and vague. In most cases, situations vary and need their own method, where it be an experiment or something different. There are simple guide lines that can be used a lot of the time but it is impossible to say 1 thing can fit everything as we don’t know we have discovered everything yet, therefore can’t test it out.

    In my opinion a science is a science because it can constantly be altered and changes along with advances in knowledge, technology e.c.t. It’s also applying the study and theory to practical things in the world and trying to explain them in a way that helps us understand the world we live in.

    At the end of the podcast, Brian asks, what do you want proof of. There are some serious answers along with some funny ones. I find this hard to answer because in the society we grow in now, many things have been proved that weren’t 10, 20, 30, 90, 1000 years ago. There are so many things that can’t be proved yet. I have an interest in medicine and how that links with the mind, so for me the question is quite controversial and for some, they may see my question as a waste. Never the less, I find it to be important and in the world we live in, it’s a huge problem. I want proof that alcoholism is a disease, not just an addiction. Millions of people try drugs and get addicted, due to the chemicals in it that make you crave more. In cigarettes, this is nicotine. However, alcohol is classed as a drug but only some who drink it loose control and become dependent upon it. 140 million alcoholics walk on the planet and only a few manage to gain control through programs like AA or through a doctor. Most die from this. Some claim they do have control but do not want to give up, but for someone to drink so much to the point of being hospitalized and needing a new liver seems to be a bad theory. Famous people like Daniel Radcliffe, Robin Williams and Stephen King were and are either in recovery or aren’t sober. This is why I want to ask this question.

    Like

  6. What makes science a science

    Personally I believe that facts and discoveries that have changed the world is what makes a science. By the fact that the things we read in a text book people have invented or discovered by building on other peoples work is truly amazing. Unlike History where it happened. No real effort goes into it. I think that the collaboration between scientists and the curious human mind pushes science to the limits. You know when you are in a science lesson because you are learning the latest understandings of the world today.

    Brian Cox- Careful application and common sense.
    Social Science- No
    Psychology- No
    Sports Science- Yes
    Economics- No
    Judo- No

    Scientology is a religious system based on the seeking of self- knowledge and spiritual fulfilment through graded courses of studying and training. It was founded by American science fiction writer called Ron Hubbard in 1955.

    Homeopathy is a system of complementary medicine in which ailments are treated by minute doses of natural substances that in larger amounts produce symptoms of ailment.

    Dr Goldarce- it is a set of tools rather than a domain of activity and also he thinks we have to be clear about the aspirations of science and the reality of science. It’s a mixture of craft, science and judgement.

    Sophie Scott- It’s a process and a thing you do. You can apply the process of science to anything in life like history. It’s a way of finding out about the world but not to find a definitive answer because regardless of what is correct at the time, it will always be disproved and that is the beauty of science. It’s a continuing process. Finding the least wrong answer.

    Evan Davis- Its about having a mid full of curiosity and being able to link it to the real world. It’s a story that all connects to give us a picture of how the world works. Rather than an illogical idea or simply not knowing. Finding out the unknown.

    I think that the scientific way of looking at things is superior to other ways because when you have a scientific outlook, your mind is always open and therefore you take into account things that other people would ignore due to their beliefs etc. Because science is forever changing, people accept that the current views on a topic can change therefore people are always therefore looking and thinking with an open mind.

    Personally, my view towards what makes science a science has slightly changed because I now believe that the outlook and perspective we have on the world makes it a science and the curiosity of wanting to know more and pushing the boundaries. Wanting to know what something is or why something happens and trying to find out instead of saying I don’t know.

    I would like to know more about how the universe was created, where the end of the universe is and what is outside the universe. Is there more?

    Like

  7. What makes science a science?

    In my opinion, science is a subject that investigates how the world works. While physics looks at the universe, chemistry looks at atoms and biology looks at cells, they all have one thing in common; they use evidence they can gather to discover as much as they can about the world we live in today. Science is very different to other subjects we may study. Scientists are prepared to change their opinions bases on new evidence, and are always trying to disprove current theories. This allows science to move forward quickly, to help us discover more about our universe.

    1) Brian Cox’s summaries science to be careful observation and the application of common sense.

    2) Social Science- no
    Psychology- no
    Sports Science- yes
    Scientology- no
    Economics- no
    Judo- no

    3) Scientology- a religious system based on the seeking of self-knowledge and spiritual fulfillment through graded courses of study and training.

    Homeopathy- a system of complementary medicine in which ailments are treated by minute doses of natural substances that in larger amounts would produce symptoms of the ailment.

    4) Ben Goldacre- about the tools you use and not the things you’re studying. Mixture of craft and judgment and also using evidence. Its difficult… is a science what we aspire to be or what we actually do? Have to be clear about the aspirations of science and the reality of science.

    Sophie- it’s a process, a thing you do. You can apply the approach of science to other subjects. It’s a way of finding out about the world. It’s a continuing process, not a case of what is true of false. Its not about truth, its about finding out information.

    Evan- about having a curiosity that relates ideas in the head or theories with the real world. It’s a convincing story- things connect in a way that humans find convincing.

    Brian Cox- the aim is to remove the human from the story. We are trying to observe nature in an objective way.

    5) In some situations, a scientific way of looking at the world is superior, because it allows us to look at things without human interference. It gives us an accurate result every time, and the results will never change. However, for other subjects, a scientific viewpoint may not be the best way of looking at it. For example in economics, the results will not be the same every time, as it will depend on human aspects.

    6) Objective views, is viewing something from an outside or impersonal view, whereas subjective is personal, because you are involved in some way.

    7) There isn’t one scientific method that can be applied to everything, as it depends on the subject. Sometimes, human interference needs to be applied to subjects, in order to get the results you want. Not everything can be looked at from an objective point of view.

    8) After listening to the podcast, my views on what makes science a science has changed slightly. I now believe that science can’t be categorized into individual subjects, and agree with Ben Goldacre that it’s about the tools we use and not the thing we are studying. You can apply a scientific method to any subject, in order to find out about our world.

    9) I would like scientific evidence of a God

    Like

  8. What makes science a science?

    “Careful observation and the use of common sense” is Brian Cox’s definition of what makes a science a science. This statement is a very narrow minded view on the subject as he does not reference the use of previous facts; instead he looks at the subject from a purely experimental view. He seems to reference only the basic skills required to interpret data from an experiment and the second part of his statement is highly simplified as well.

    Social Science – No
    Psychology – No
    Sports Science – Yes
    Scientology – No
    Economics – No
    Judo – No

    Scientology is scientific beliefs based around works of science fiction rather than actual fact. There is quite a large following of this idea in the form of the Church of Scientology whom base their knowledge on fiction derived from the “fact” of Star Wars and Star Trek. Homeopathy is the idea of alternative forms of medicine, which first became popular in 1796. The theory was that remedies which cause the symptoms of an illness in healthy people will cure the illness of similar symptoms.

    Personally agree with Sophie Scott as I believe that science is not the search for the answer I believe I to be the search for the answer which is least wrong at the time. Although we have an answer for something like the structure of an atom the research continues even though there is an answer, the aim is to prove the last ‘fact’ wrong. Yet I do not disagree with any of the panel as they all seem to base their answer around the idea that science is a progressive line which always aims to better the last thing which was called fact. Although Brian says the aim is to remove the human element he is still aiming to prove the last thing wrong.

    Science seems to purely be based around objective views rather than subjective views as the scientific community values facts over opinion which can make it difficult to have a purely scientific view on the world. This is because a scientist will constantly require evidence behind a theory and not appreciate it till the evidence exists. Therefore a scientific view of the world may not be the best way as although you have an open mind towards theories you have a thirst for the hard truth rather than educated guesses.

    My view on science has been solidified by this podcast as it has finalised my idea that science is not a search for the truth but only the answer which is the least wrong. The overall message of the podcast to me is that science is a progressive subject which will continue to delve deeper into what we think we know for ‘fact’.

    I would like proof of other intelligent life in the universe, the fast expanse of space cannot be completely empty… can it?

    Like

  9. What makes science a science?

    “Careful observation and the use of common sense” is Brian Cox’s definition of what makes a science a science. This statement is a very narrow minded view on the subject as he does not reference the use of previous facts; instead he looks at the subject from a purely experimental view. He seems to reference only the basic skills required to interpret data from an experiment and the second part of his statement is highly simplified as well.

    Social Science – No
    Psychology – No
    Sports Science – Yes
    Scientology – No
    Economics – No
    Judo – No

    Scientology is scientific beliefs based around works of science fiction rather than actual fact. There is quite a large following of this idea in the form of the Church of Scientology whom base their knowledge on fiction derived from the “fact” of Star Wars and Star Trek. Homeopathy is the idea of alternative forms of medicine, which first became popular in 1796. The theory was that remedies which cause the symptoms of an illness in healthy people will cure the illness of similar symptoms.

    Personally agree with Sophie Scott as I believe that science is not the search for the answer I believe I to be the search for the answer which is least wrong at the time. Although we have an answer for something like the structure of an atom the research continues even though there is an answer, the aim is to prove the last ‘fact’ wrong. Yet I do not disagree with any of the panel as they all seem to base their answer around the idea that science is a progressive line which always aims to better the last thing which was called fact. Although Brian says the aim is to remove the human element he is still aiming to prove the last thing wrong.

    Science seems to purely be based around objective views rather than subjective views as the scientific community values facts over opinion which can make it difficult to have a purely scientific view on the world. This is because a scientist will constantly require evidence behind a theory and not appreciate it till the evidence exists. Therefore a scientific view of the world may not be the best way as although you have an open mind towards theories you have a thirst for the hard truth rather than educated guesses.

    My view on science has been solidified by this podcast as it has finalised my idea that science is not a search for the truth but only the answer which is the least wrong. The overall message of the podcast to me is that science is a progressive subject which will continue to delve deeper into what we think we know for ‘fact’.

    I would like proof of other intelligent life in the universe, the fast expanse of space cannot be completely empty… can it?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

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