Scientific Humility: Scientific Honesty – Hypothesis and Science

Darwin Under Siege (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is not that scientists make an hypothesis first, and then try to find the data to fit that hypothesis. Rather, the process is first observation, then an hypothes is made to describe the data, then conclude that the data has been described by the hypothesis. But this is not an explanation of the phenomenon. It is merely a description of the data in different terms, usually mathematics. It is essentially a tautology. Thus to observe various points and connect them by a line or curve, then to find the mathematical formula that will construct that curve is said to be the law of the curve or the law governing the data points. If those data points happen to be the positions of a planet in space at different times, then the mathematical equation that produces the points on that curve is called the law of motion of the planets. Now, in origin of life studies, observation reveals that life comes from life only. There is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that life is produced out of non-living matter. It was Louis Pasteur who disproved this theory of abiogenesis. From a purely empirical viewpoint, therefore, we have no justification for stating that life comes from inanimate matter. The evidence is that throughout the entire history of modern science such a production of life from matter has never been observed. The question is: Why make a hypothesis about something that has never been observed? If we want to be scientific, then our hypothesis must match the data. Life comes from life is observed all over the Earth, and we might say, all over the universe as far as we have observed it. So where is the justification for claiming otherwise? Rather, we must conclude that the claim that life comes from matter is completely unscientific because it is not a conclusion based on any empirical observation at all. It is purely wishful thinking — a “naturalistic” or materialistic ideology that is masquerading as science. It is thus doubly deceitful since it is not only an unproven belief but an ideology that poses as a scientific theory.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Intellectual Humility.Ian M. Church & Justin Barrett - 2016 - In Everett L. Worthington Jr, Don E. Davis & Joshua N. Hook (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Humility. Springer.
Humility, Contingency, and Pluralism in the Sciences.Ian James Kidd - 2021 - In Mark Alfano, Michael Patrick Lynch & Alessandra Tanesini (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Humility. New York, NY: Routledge. pp. 346-358.
False Intellectual Humility.Allan Hazlett - 2021 - In Mark Alfano, Michael Patrick Lynch & Alessandra Tanesini (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Humility. New York, NY: Routledge.
Humility.James Kellenberger - 2010 - American Philosophical Quarterly 47 (4):321-336.
Humility and Ethical Development.Cathy Mason - 2020 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 17 (1).
Is Intellectual Humility Compatible with Religious Dogmatism?Ian M. Church - 2018 - Journal of Psychology and Theology 46 (4):226-232.
Honesty as a Foundational Virtue in Light of Mystical Ethics.Seyed Ahmad Fazeli - 2018 - پژوهشنامه فلسفه دین 16 (1):173-195.
Standing humbly before nature.Lisa Gerber - 2002 - Ethics and the Environment 7 (1):39-53.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-03-03

Downloads
104 (#161,956)

6 months
43 (#87,487)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Bhakti Madhava Puri, Ph. D.
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture and Science

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references