Scientific Method Mrs. DoumaScientific Thinking
SCIENTIFIC VERSUS NON-SCIENTIFIC THINKING
One of the most effective ways to illustrate the difference between scientific and non-scientific thinking is through a comparison between inductive and deductive reasoning.
Science is based on inductive reasoning. The inductive thinking process starts by collecting empirical (physical, concrete, testable) facts, data, and other pieces of information and then trying to interpret what this information is “saying.” The more facts and data the better and none can be ignored or thrown out just because one doesn’t like what they are “saying.”
By looking at the connections among the facts and information, a scientist can develop powerful, far-reaching ideas called theories. Scientific theories are not flimsy thoughts but are concrete ideas based on a bedrock of empirical information. But scientific theories can never be considered what philosophers refer to as “absolute truth.” Scientific ideas are open to change based on new information that is discovered. It is essential that the scientific process remain flexible and open.
Philosophy, religion, and politics, on the other hand, are excellent examples of deductive reasoning. In these areas of thought the big ideas, often referred to as the basic “truths” are created first. Then, later on, the search for facts to support these “truths” begins. Since these “truths” become the foundation of a particular philosophy, religion, or political point of view, and humans develop deep emotional attachments to such concepts, they must become sacrosanct and immune to scrutiny. Therefore the basic “truths” must be protected from change, otherwise the philosophy, religion, or political point of view will be undermined.
The search for supportive facts, when it does begin, must be selective. Facts or data that support the basic “truths” are enthusiastically embraced. The facts and data collected may or may not be empirical. Information that undermines the basic “truths” is ignored, discarded, or ridiculed. Info that does not support the basic “truths” of a particular philosophy, religion, or political point of view threatens the basic tenets upon which these bodies of thought depend for their existence. Humans who attach themselves to a particular philosophy, religion, or political thought become emotionally invested in protecting their pillars of “truth.” This is why the Catholic Church threatened to execute Galileo and Copernicus when they proposed that the Earth was not the center of the universe. The scientific facts shook the pillars of “truth” upon which the Church stood.
Deep emotional attachment to particular philosophies causes people to view the world with a filter. They dismiss ideas that threaten their preconceived notions and accept ideas that do not. This is why science is based primarily on inductive thinking.
Inductive Reasoning works like this:
Big Idea or Theory
Deductive Reasoning works like this:
Big idea or basic “truth”
fact fact fact fact
fact fact fact