Science is fundamentally a rational activity, and the scientific explanation must make sense. Religion
may rest on revelations, custom, or traditions, gambling on faith, but science must rest on logical reason.
There are two distinct logical systems important to the scientific quest, referred to as deductive logic
and inductive logic. Beveridge describes them as follows:
Logicians distinguish between inductive reasoning (from particular instances to general
principles, from facts to theories) and deductive reasoning (from the general to the particular,
applying a theory to a particular case). In induction one starts from observed data and
develops a generalization which explains the relationships between the objects observed. On
the other hand, in deductive reasoning one starts from some general law and applies it to a
particular instance.
The classical illustration of deductive logic is the familiar syllogism: “All men are mortal; Mahmood is
man; therefore Mahmood is mortal.” A researcher might then follow up this deductive exercise with an
empirical test of Mahmood’s mortality.
Using inductive logic, the researcher might begin by noting that Mahmood is mortal and observing a
number of other mortals as well. He might then note that all the observed mortals were men, thereby
arriving at the tentative conclusion that all men are mortal.
In practice, scientific research involves both inductive and deductive reasoning as the scientist shifts
endlessly back and forth between theory and empirical observations.
There could be some other aspects of scientific method (e.g. self correcting) but what is important is that
all features are interrelated. Scientists may not adhere to all these characteristics. For example,
objectivity is often violated especially in the study of human behavior, particularly when human beings
are studied by the human beings. Personal biases of the researchers do contaminate the findings.
Looking at the important features of scientific method one might say that there are two power bases of
scientific knowledge: (1) empiricism i.e. sensory experiences or observation, and (2) rationalism i.e. the
logical explanations for regularity and then consequent ional argumentation for making generalizations
(theory).
Finally it may be said that anybody who is following the scientific procedure of doing research is doing
a scientific research; and the knowledge generated by such research is scientific knowledge. Depending
upon the subject matter, we try to divide the sciences into physical or natural sciences and the social
sciences. Due to the nature of the subject matter of the social sciences, it is rather very difficult to apply
the scientific method of research rigorously and that is why the predictions made by the social
researchers are not as dependable as the predictions made by the natural scientists.
may rest on revelations, custom, or traditions, gambling on faith, but science must rest on logical reason.
There are two distinct logical systems important to the scientific quest, referred to as deductive logic
and inductive logic. Beveridge describes them as follows:
Logicians distinguish between inductive reasoning (from particular instances to general
principles, from facts to theories) and deductive reasoning (from the general to the particular,
applying a theory to a particular case). In induction one starts from observed data and
develops a generalization which explains the relationships between the objects observed. On
the other hand, in deductive reasoning one starts from some general law and applies it to a
particular instance.
The classical illustration of deductive logic is the familiar syllogism: “All men are mortal; Mahmood is
man; therefore Mahmood is mortal.” A researcher might then follow up this deductive exercise with an
empirical test of Mahmood’s mortality.
Using inductive logic, the researcher might begin by noting that Mahmood is mortal and observing a
number of other mortals as well. He might then note that all the observed mortals were men, thereby
arriving at the tentative conclusion that all men are mortal.
In practice, scientific research involves both inductive and deductive reasoning as the scientist shifts
endlessly back and forth between theory and empirical observations.
There could be some other aspects of scientific method (e.g. self correcting) but what is important is that
all features are interrelated. Scientists may not adhere to all these characteristics. For example,
objectivity is often violated especially in the study of human behavior, particularly when human beings
are studied by the human beings. Personal biases of the researchers do contaminate the findings.
Looking at the important features of scientific method one might say that there are two power bases of
scientific knowledge: (1) empiricism i.e. sensory experiences or observation, and (2) rationalism i.e. the
logical explanations for regularity and then consequent ional argumentation for making generalizations
(theory).
Finally it may be said that anybody who is following the scientific procedure of doing research is doing
a scientific research; and the knowledge generated by such research is scientific knowledge. Depending
upon the subject matter, we try to divide the sciences into physical or natural sciences and the social
sciences. Due to the nature of the subject matter of the social sciences, it is rather very difficult to apply
the scientific method of research rigorously and that is why the predictions made by the social
researchers are not as dependable as the predictions made by the natural scientists.
No comments:
Post a Comment