Theory of Knowledge - 1

Theory of Knowledge
In today’s society, science is regarded as being the most trusted form of knowledge, leading to many claiming it to be the supreme form of knowledge. To investigate whether or not this is justified we must compare science to other forms/areas of knowledge and consider what they each contribute. The strongest argument science has to claim this title, is the objectivity and empirical nature of its method and in particular its verifying processes; mainly based on inductive and deductive reasoning. Modern science is closely related to inductive reasoning and is presented as a distinctive feature of scientific activity today. Induction works by verification: correspondence process, which involves making predictions about the future based on past experience. However, problems with this technique limit the validity of the conclusions drawn from it. Primarily the problem is the degree of accuracy attached to any conclusion made, which is tied to the number of observations that confirm with it. Likewise, the appearance of a single observation that does not conform to the general law invalidates the conclusion. In comparison, Deductive reasoning is a more accurate verification technique, as it does not allow for ‘degrees of accuracy’. It works through verification: coherence process, which involves formulating a general law which becomes standard and by which any further examples are judged against. Eventually scientists have come to realise the methodological problems with these two techniques of verification. In an attempt to eliminate these fundamental errors, scientists have attempted to incorporate the fundamental aspects of inductive and deductive reasoning, whilst also attempting to eliminate their major flaws. The most prolific of these adapted verification processes are the Hypothetico deductive model, a modern formulation associated with famous scientists such as Popper and Hemple. It works by using a combination of both verification...