Because according to some articles, this concept is false. According to them, the main objective of science is to develop the students' thinking skills so that htey can understand the world qround them, and not to make the students to memorize concepts in science. What can you say about this?
2007-02-05 17:26:33 · 6 answers · asked by ARBEN A 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Other - Science
Science is nothing more than a method: Observe, hypothesize, experiment, predict. Observe a phenomena, hypothesize a mechanism why that phenomena occurs, do an experiment to test your hypotheses, and (assuming your experiment confirms your hypothesis), use your hypothesis (or theory) to predict new results.
Each of these steps is simple to understand but challenging to do. In most sciences, but not all, mathematics is the basic "language" used in the hypothesis stage. Experiments must be repeatable, so that in principle anyone can do them. A strong theory can be used to predict new results, ones never thought of before; which are then observed, starting the whole process over again.
That's all science is. It has no agenda, isn't trying to prove anything, it has no "purpose". It is simply a method to understand an observation. Sometimes a theory satisfies all these requirements, then years later a totally new observation from a different experiment requires the original theory to change. (For 2000 years, the theory that the Earth was the center of the universe meet every observation, until Galileo). That does not negate science - it means science continues to work.
Religion is not science, because religion does not require experimentation nor can it make any prediction. Memorizing concepts in science may help a person do science, but it's not essential. However, due to the experimental stage, anything accepted in science should be able to stand up against independent experiments (or analysis, etc).
2007-02-05 17:45:37 · answer #1 · answered by ZenPenguin 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Just like any essay, anybody can have an opinion about what science is. But taking that position does not make the statement false.
Science is still an organized body of knowledge, organized -true, else it is just a bunch of data of which science is not. That organization did not just occur by itself. It came about with the systematic application of the scientific method, not just memorizing of concepts, more of understanding of concepts to come up with an organized set of data meaningful enough for public consumption and analysis of the nature around us.
2007-02-06 01:44:51 · answer #2 · answered by Aldo 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Those articles are correct. Science is *not* an organized body of knowledge (although it produces organized bodies of knowledge).
Science is a *method* for learning things and figuring things out.
2007-02-06 01:35:44 · answer #3 · answered by extton 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Science is a method, like everyone else has said.
2007-02-06 02:04:24 · answer #4 · answered by Tricia 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
for me science is a systematic body of knowledge
2007-02-08 21:03:21 · answer #5 · answered by rio_cage23 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They live off grants and a whole lot of taxpayer money, in all level of government.
Most of them create their own job.
They have to show something or should I say anything to keep that grant money coming in.
"IT'S WHO EVER HAS THE PENCIL."
2007-02-06 02:49:48 · answer #6 · answered by DeeJay 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋