62 online
 
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 31 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Doctoring Science

By       (Page 2 of 2 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.   7 comments

Science, for instance, can not answer questions relating to the supernatural, since the supernatural can neither be measured, quantified, tested, verified, nor falsified. Science is ill-suited as well to address the existential longings and anxieties of humanity. It cannot tell us what we ought to do, only what we can do. Definitions of hope and meaning are missing in science, and for many people religion is what fills that void.

Science does not and can not produce absolute and unquestionable truth. Understanding is understood as simply the best fit to the data under current instrumental and philosophical limits of thinking. A scientific theory is merely a way of organizing tested and retested ideas to describe the behavior of natural phenomena.

But scientific theories are not the same as “hunches” or “gut feelings”, which is the context in which the nonscientist uses the word theory. Scientists place a much higher standard on the word theory. To them a theory is a powerful statement about the working of nature, a strong explanation that ties together many reproducible facts from many different sources into an overall, unifying concept.

A scientific theory is always open to falsification, if new evidence is presented. Theories should change, as new discoveries are made, and old theories are updated to account for new data, which is exactly the progress toward better understanding that science seeks. But to say “scientific theory” is not to imply “scientific uncertainty”, a clever term employed by religious and political operatives to cast doubt in the public mind when a scientific theory challenges a traditional way of thinking.

Too often the public sees science only after it passes through the prism of politics, despite that science is by its very nature nonpolitical. And when scientists counter public ignorance and misinformation about science with science-intensive responses, neither the public nor the cause of science is helped. Much of the public tunes out such technical messages.

We must nevertheless pay attention when science has something to tell us. As that most famous of all modern scientists, Albert Einstein, once counseled, “You must learn to distinguish between what is true, and what is real.”

Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

Todd Huffman Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Todd Huffman is a pediatrician and writer living in Eugene, Oregon. He is a regular contributor to many newspapers and publications throughout the Pacific Northwest.
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

 
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Do Parents Matter?

The Crisis of Meth

What Does Freedom Mean Anymore?

Rules Don't Apply To Me

Poverty In America: A Republican Moral Failing

Stem Cells To Stay Locked Up

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend