Unit 1
This website defines the differences between a science and a pseudo-science. I found this to be interesting because even in the section describing pseudo-science, it says the “science” of a pseudo-science. As a psychologist, the argument between science and pseudo-science is one I have become accustomed to engaging in. This article describes the differences not only from a point of literal definitions but also from the social constructionist views.
This website is a good example to better organize and explain the correct version of the scientific method. This website is helpful because not only does it establish the correct scientific method and explain each section in depth, but it utilizes a chart to better illustrate the method. The website caters to all learning types by providing literary and visual descriptors to explain the scientific method.
While this article covers elementary curriculum as a whole, it covers the concept that we established in class, that the scientific method is taught incorrectly in elementary schools. While I may not agree with all the concepts that are brought out in this article, it provides an interesting outlook on where the elementary curriculum is successful and where is fails as well. It establishes where the shortcomings of the early educational system in science lay.
During this semester one of the biggest things I have learned is the true definition between a scientific theory and a scientific law. I always followed by the elementary school laws that taught me that a law was a proven theory, this article reiterates what we learned in lectures, that a law is not a proven theory but a theory that is not disproven. This article offers charts, definitions and examples to establish the difference and technical truth of the scientific theories and laws.
Questions:
1a. Search the web and find three or more webpages that define or distinguish between scientific theories and laws (you may also want to include the word “model”) and give URLs. Are the definitions you found the same? What is different about them? Does there seem to be a consensus on how these words are defined in science? Given what you have found and what we discussed in class, write your own personal definition of a scientific theory and a scientific law.
- https://blog.ed.ted.com/2016/06/07/whats-the-difference-between-a-scientific-law-and-theory-in-ted-ed-gifs/
- https://futurism.com/hypothesis-theory-or-law
- https://www.livescience.com/21457-what-is-a-law-in-science-definition-of-scientific-law.html
Scientific theory is ideas and methods that could be proven true through experiment while scientific law are experiments and theories that have been proven to be true. The explanations that I found in these articles were very similar. There difference between science and law is very small. Essentially, theories are the explanations for laws. Laws are observed generalizations in nature. The three websites I found stated that this definition. If there is a technological advance which helps prove a theory correct, it could overrule a law. Laws are what can be proven with the understand humans have at this time. It was once thought that the world was flat and at the center of the universe until modern science evolved enough to understand the earth is round, and a little spec in the enormous solar system. According to all three websites the concepts of theories and laws are dumbed down in younger education. When we learn these more, we learn the true definitions for each. My definition of a law would be a scientific observation that is generalized to real world application. My definition of a scientific theory is the explanation for why the law happens.
1b. Consider Pontius Pilate’s famous question: “What is truth?” What is truth for a scientist? Can a theory be true? Can a law be true? Would a mathematician or logician answer this question differently? How about a lawyer? Think of one other profession that might have a particular definition of “truth”.”
For a scientist, truth is what can be observed. Being able to observe things is how laws and theories are created. This is how we judge science and scientific event. Therefore, truth is what is observed in the eye of a scientist. When we observe the world, we are able to make a law, then from that law we are able to create theories to explain it. Therefore, a theory can be considered true as it is attempting to explain why something observable in nature is happening. A law is considered true because, as we have explained before, a law is a generalized observation. We see that an event happens over and over again. Therefore, we see the generalization of the observation which is automatically considered true. Mathematicians or logicians would see this answer the same because math is predictable.
While science sometimes experiences unpredictability, mathematics is a constant and is never changing. Therefore, mathematics and logics are considered truth because they are difficult to disprove. Lawyers see truth as subjective. Lawyers deal with the judgement of human behavior. Therefore, what is one persons’ truth is not everybody’s truth. Lawyers are not always seeking the truth, but rather seek justice. One other profession that presents the “truth” issue is a psychologist. Psychologists believe that truth is in the individuals. An individual is the one that has the right define his or her truth.
1c. What would you say to someone who says “God isn’t scientific: you can’t prove to me that he exists. Why should I have any interest in becoming a Christian?”
Faith is a leap. You may not be able to see God and therefore you may not believe that he exists. However, you don’t know that he doesn’t exist. You can’t see gravity, yet you believe that if you fall off a building you will fall down. This same blind faith is religion. You believe in gravity because you have seen it work. You dropped a pen and it fell to the ground. Similarly, we have seen the things that God has presented to us and have recognized it to be a Godly event. Therefore, we have seen faith play out without seeing God himself. Faith is sometimes blind. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t still exist.
