Science prided itself of being
the sole arbiter of true knowledge. It
started when many existing beliefs held by the Church were challenged by newly
scientific truths discovered by scientists during the Scientific
Revolution. For example, Church
authorities in Medieval times propounded the idea that earth is the center of
the universe. This was also premised in
the ideas that God created the universe; man finds favour in him of all other
things; so earth should be at the center in the scheme of things as man’s
dwelling place. All these strings of
beliefs were somehow weaved into one system with some elements of religious
beliefs through speculation without due regard to their empirical
contents. Thus, when Copernicus was able
to establish the fact –with the help of new invented technology like telescope,
that the sun is the center of the universe, there was a gradual change in
conviction that knowledge becomes more reliable if founded in science through observation. What is derived from speculation or faith is
considered spurious; what is derived from observation is considered reliable
and true.
From then on, the rule of the day
is science and its objectivity in
arriving truth. Eventually, science has
become proud to be the new arbiter of truth replacing the olden days of the
church. Science has claimed infallible
in its newly-found knowledge. It cannot
get wrong or mistaken of its newly-found knowledge. Its knowledge is grounded on empirical
evidence gathered through experimentation.
It has even become proud that scientific knowledge is better than any
knowledge gained from speculation or faith.
However, observation alone is not
enough to establish a true knowledge.
Scientists are very aware of this.
Thus, as an observer or scientist, he has to develop in him a discipline
and an attitude, which are unique among scientists. His discipline consists of being neutral in
his investigation. His attitude consists
of being keen in finding the right problem, in formulating the right
hypothesis, in finding sufficient evidence to support his hypothesis, and
making objective conclusion. Without his
scientific discipline and attitude, his observation and finding are
unreliable. Thus, science is not only
about finding objective truth but also a matter of personal discipline and an
art.
In all of its success, science
has never been in its pedestal without various challenges. One persistent challenge it encountered is
its claim of infallibility –that is, science can’t get wrong of its
truth-claims. To date, there are two
prominent thinkers who challenged its infallibility, namely: Thomas Kuhn and
Karl Popper. Kuhn’s treatment is
interesting yet I shall dispense myself of not discussing it here.
Popper is famous of the “principle
of falsifiability.” In so far as science
speaks about reality, it must be falsifiable.
This principle applies to any field of science such as in medical
science, in physical science, in biological science, in astronomical science,
and among others. In medical science,
for example, scientists claim that condom can protect users from contacting or transmitting
HIV/AIDS virus or STDs but, for Popper, it must be falsifiable. Medical scientists can get wrong of this
claim. In astronomical science,
astronomers claim that there are only 8 planets in the solar system, again it
is falsifiable. Astronomers can get
wrong. All forms of scientific knowledge
are practically falsifiable. The point,
however, is not that truth is untenable.
Scientific knowledge can be made certain but its process of arriving it,
which is through inductive reasoning, is not that sound to establish a
knowledge that can no longer be put to doubt.
Induction gives us only a probable conclusion.
Nowadays, many experts like
researchers will try to convince us that in every undertaking we take, we have
to pay attention to any scientific knowledge.
Expressions like “research-based” education, “research-based”
instruction, “research-based” curriculum, and so on are manifestations that
science unlike any other fields gives us satisfaction to our insatiable desire
for truth.
