How to Answer a Question Without Guessing
By: Keith
Besides the ability to read the next most important educational milestone is the successful understanding of the scientific method. This year marks the 350th anniversary of the birth of modern science. It was 350 years ago that the Royal Society was founded by the followers of Sir Francis Bacon. It was Bacon who first argued that knowledge is gained by testing ideas with experiments. It was the Royal Society that invented the principals of modern science, peer reviews and scientific publishing. It is a matter of curiosity that continues to bring the societies members together, all 1300 of them (74 of which are Nobel Laureates). And, it’s the curiosity of the original members that we can thank for establishing the process by which we make discoveries and grow as a human race. The scientific method is perhaps the greatest single educational achievement in history. Consider where we would be without it. Any crackpot on a whim could say whatever he wanted and there would be no method by which we could all say he was nuts. We would simply be shouting at each other our opinions, which we all know are good for nothing without proof. As much as that sounds like cable TV these days and our televangelist society, imagine how much worse it would be without real knowledge.
The Scientific Method:
1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.
2. Create a consistent description of the observation, called a hypothesis.
3. Use the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations. All Valid scientific hypotheses must be testable.
4. Test the predictions through experimentation. Modify the hypothesis based on your findings.
5. Peer review. Performance of experimental test of the prediction by several independent experimenters conducting properly performed experiments.
There are many things that annoy me about people. One of the biggest is people mistaking their feelings for proof of an assertion. We are all subject to the vagaries of emotional reasoning. Sometimes it simply takes someone else to say “Prove it” for us to snap out of it and say “Oh, sorry. I was just feeling X, Y or Z.” I want my kids to understand the difference between emotion and fact; it’s the only thing that’s going to save them from a life of perpetual ignorance. After all, people’s feelings are what are responsible for the belief in voodoo and magic. When is the last time anybody has seen voodoo put through the scientific method? Those people might as well be living 351 years ago for the amount of progress they are allowing themselves.
The Obvious Correlation to God:
I do not tell my kids there is a God. In good conscience I cannot do that. Atheists say there is no God. I can’t say there is one way or the other. All I can say is that there might be but that it has not been proven through experimentation. The virtues of the scientific method will lead my boys to the truth. Perhaps they will prove the existence of God some day. While they are looking for God though, they might also discover something about quantum mechanics and the fabric of our universe. On their journey to the truth they will enlighten us all. That is far more valuable than simply having a feeling and running with it. Who can deny the truth when it is actually the truth? My boy asked me yesterday if he could prove God. I said, “Nobody has done it yet. Start studying and you might be the first.”
No related posts.
No one ever will. If there is God, if God is real, no one can prove it but God. What you’re saying is that a man (or woman) might could prove God by scientific method and that if this happens, the world will believe. If it doesn’t happen, then God is always an illusive idea. But that is the very thing “God” is. The very idea of God carries with it an understanding that this being is beyond us and beyond any sort of material or conscious predictability. But suppose we did it! It would only be because this being wanted us to. The definition of God belongs to an understanding that is not shaped by words or proof.
All that being said, I’d argue that faith is not simply a stupider way to live. It is a way to live within one’s questions and one’s doubts. People who say they believe in God and have no doubts or questions make me think they haven’t given it much thought at all and I think you are ahead of the game simply by virtue of your curiosity. Thanks for your post. You always have such interesting topics.
Beth. I was pretty sure I’d get some good responses on this one
You do not disappoint! I did not mean to say that those who believe in some supernatural power are stupid. I don’t think that’s true. I just think they chose, beyond the reach of proof, to believe. It’s not that I’m smarter for my uncertainty, simply that if we all took the laws of nature as a matter of faith that science would not have progressed to where it is today. Definitely not about smarts, just about how we chose to live our lives. Thanks again for another thoughtful comment, Beth!
I find this delightful, informative, and refreshing. (Questions of God were always the trickiest in our household – thus my answers were always very open. It seems to me that your response was as well.)
I will say that in our household, we are comfortable with contradictions. With things felt or believed without tangible proof. (Can you prove love, or only observe and occasionally measure its effects? Can you prove the mysterious things that family members sometimes know – across miles – without any way of doing so?)
Provocative and informative piece, Keith. I don’t have answers; only questions.
.-= BigLittleWolf´s last blog ..The Bad Boy =-.
You know, Wolf, I’m not convinced that Love is unprovable. It’s a feeling, but I think it could be tested through experimentation. As a matter of fact, have you heard of the guy who was so depressed that he shot himself in the head to commit suicide. He failed, and when he woke up his depression was gone and his friends and family say he was “knew man”. he didn’t even remember shooting himself in the head. Or, the guy who underwent brain surgery and woke up hating everything — even his family (the made it into an episode of HOUSE). I wonder if anybody has ever tried to isolate the part of the brain that feels love and then tinker with it. Hmmm, I don’t know about that stuff about family members feeling stuff from far away. I have a twin sister and I’ve never felt anything like that. But, other people say they have. I don’t know.
You always provide great conversation, Wolf! Thanks for the stimulating questions
This is a topic I’ve given a fair amount of contemplation to. We live in an astoundingly intellectually vulnerable society – and certain sectors of corporate America (including many religious institutions) have taken full advantage of that ignorance, lining their pockets handsomely on the lack of reason-ability of this nation. A wise philosopher whose works I study said something to the effect of “You are a fool if you believe anything I teach.” But sadly, isn’t that the status quo in today’s society? If a teacher/doctor/commercial/infomercial/president/senator/newspaper/etc. said it, it must be true, too many of us believe it to be so without doing our own due-diligence. I, too, homeschool my children, and top on my list of things I wish my children to learn is exactly what you have written about in this post.
.-= Brian Skory´s last blog ..Your Child’s Possessions =-.
Brian, I think that’s a great philosophical quote. That is pretty much the status quo these days. Some talking head says something and everyone just believes it because he’s the “expert”. I went to a conference one time where the speaker was the ex CEO of Skunk Works (an internal division of Lockheed that’s responsible for testing and developing cutting edge aircraft). He was hired to speak because he was an “expert”, but his first quote was something like “The difference between experts and you is that experts are from somewhere else and get paid more than you.” I thought that was funny. Thanks for the comment!
In reference to the principles of the Scientific Method, I would like to point out that many others say that the “real” founder of the Scientific Method was the italian Galileo Galilei, with all due respect to Sir Francis, and Descartes who is the “other” presumed father of the SM (too bad we can’t run a DNA test on stuff like this). Galileo studied the laws of motion and challenged the existing model of the solar system. By the way, just last year, we celebrated 400 years since Galileo first pointed his telescope to the explore the universe (astronomy2009.org). With that simple act of curiosity, Galileo literally opened up a “whole universe” for humankind to discover and explore.
It is interesting to note that -just as you presented it in your article- science and religion are often times intermingled. Galileo’s life was a good example of that…
Thanks Carlos! This sounds a bit like the “who founded America?” discussion
I suppose there are many who can claim a piece of progress. Thank you for adding to the discussion. It’s tough to broach the subject of Science and Religion, but It has to be done because they have had an intertwined history for so long. Thanks again!