Science and Scientific Methodology with A Critical View; Does Science Make Mistakes?

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) | Volume V, Issue XII, December 2021 | ISSN 2454–6186

Science and Scientific Methodology with A Critical View; Does Science Make Mistakes?

Abdullah Murat Tuncer
Conley American University, Türkiye

INTRODUCTION

Despite its many definitions exist, science, in a concise way, is described as methodical and systematic knowledge, that carries, always and everywhere, qualities of validity and certainty and that is obtained through academic research methods and attested by way of implementation. (Britannica.com/science, 2021). The attempt of human-being to build up knowledge and make laws by studying in a methodical manner and a systematic way, based on observing, experimenting and reasoning is called science. Scientific knowledge, on the other hand, is knowledge that has been obtained via scientific methods (acikders.ankara.edu.tr 2021). The resulting data must be universally valid. Likewise, researchers ought to be unbiased and research has to be objective.
As for the scientific method, it is a method of systematic research and access to information, based on reasoning, trying to prove a particular subject through experimentation and observation (Gutting, 2000, Singh 2016). However, this fact may differ in various types of science; since experimental research in social sciences can be challenging. Everything that holds a statistically significant relationship among them might not be scientific. For instance: In a country with a majority of brunettes, most people who suffer from heart disease and respond to certain medications also have black hair. Therefore, we cannot say that black-haired people respond well to heart disease treatment more. Let us have a grip on a more familiar example. While four people A, B, C and D dining at a restaurant, A eats shrimp; B eats shrimp and fish; C eats shrimp and octopus; and D has only tasted shrimp, octopus, fish and mussels. All these four people get sick afterwards. Then, what food has caused the illness? The answer to this question in scientific way is shrimp, however the real reason for illness might not be in that way at all. Without resolving the followings, this question cannot be answered. Where did this incident take place and at that time what is the illness rate among those who has never happened to be at that restaurant? How are the health compliance rules followed in the restaurant? Are there any other persons eating at that restaurant and getting sick in the aftermath? Is there any possibility that the water used or any other liquid have happened to cause illness? In other words, scientific methodology does not always yield accurate results. An analytical approach is to be necessitated that asks about the data to be used and the questions to be asked.
The “Scientific Truth” Problem
What is the ‘scientific reality’, frequently referred to in our conversations? Indeed, scientific reality cannot exist. If something has been accepted as the explicit and clear-cut truth, then, it is a priori. For science is the most influential reference point of our lives, if data is scientific, then it is welcomed fast by society. Even so, being scientific does not render data uncontested. We can explain the definition of ‘a priori’, in the meaning to be employing knowledge and a set of principles known to be true to decide what their possible effects or consequences of these will be. Scientific data is information that needs to be verified or otherwise to be refuted.

Read More