What is science？We have been asked to science since childhood, but what is science has never been told.

Before science, people believed in superstition for thousands of years, so is superstition really so nothing?Just as Western Medicine excludes Chinese medicine now
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Is history science?Archaeologically digging out a piece of skull, dare to say that it is Beijing?And now that the skull is lost, the more unscrupulous Beijing people are the Homo sapiens living on the Chinese land.
Language is science?Two ends of the truth of China, there are “scholars who can kill or humiliate”, “good death is worse than alive”
Is mathematics science?The basic logic of mathematics, the theory of logic proves that the “three -paragraph theory” proves are incorrect, but in mathematics, the most fundamental thing is not “you are people, people are stupid, so you are stupid”.
Politics is science?Materialist dialectics, ideal dialectics, China talks about materialism, Marx’s materialism, and Marx itself is extracted from Hegel and Ferbaha’s idealism dialectics to form materialism.The part of the part is the essence of the material?
Physics is science?All physics is based on a certain assumption, both the theory of relativity or Newton, and the assumptions cannot be confirmed at least now.From a logical perspective, the basis of pushing the physics is empty.
So what is the opposite of science, what is superstition, superstition must be wrong?This argument cannot stand like “science must be correct”, because of the basic philosophy of science, the philosophy of Marxist materialism you have learned has already judged that “the truth is also relative”, that is,: “Public saying and publicity, my mother -in -law said”It is the right truth.

In almost every field, the awareness of Volkswagen and the academic circles in this field is different.EssenceLet’s see how professional people think of science.

“In a sense, what is science is misleading? Science is constantly developing and changing, and it is impossible to give a universal and accurate scientific outlook. What kind of development and changes have the physical science experience that have been reproduced a long time ago through interspersed examples.”” “”

“What is science” Allen Charmers

1. Science is a knowledge derived from empirical facts

This part must be criticized for criticizing this view

The fact is that the scientific foundation can be subdivided into three parts

(1) The fact is to directly give the observers who give it directly and unbiasedly.

(2) Facts first, and independent theory

(3) Facts constitute the basis of scientific knowledge and reliable and reliable

It will see that these claims are all problems.

a. Discuss only from visual.

The light of the object enters the retina through the medium to form an object image.However, the image occurs on the retinal image into the process of entering the brain’s central leather layer through visual nerves.

Because this process is experienced.Different knowledge backgrounds, different cultural backgrounds, etc. will “see ‘to different things.For example, the flat map of the stairs

There is no such thing as a staircase in African tribes, nor does it use the experience of three -dimensional objects in two -dimensional vision, so the stairs will not be seen at all.

Another example is X -ray films, doctors will see the parts and types of the lesion, and ordinary people cannot see it.

B before the observer, the conceptual framework and some knowledge have been already.

Botanist and ordinary people to inspect a forest land. The former will collect more facts. Botanical knowledge is a prerequisite for constituting expressions.That is to say, it is an observation based on the theoretical basis of the predecessors. The observation statement is based on knowledge.

c to observe the error of the statement

For example, the fire is rising, the earth is still, and the size of Venus Mars is unchanged.

These observations are denyed, and some of our current observations may be wrong.

Note that it is not completely wrong, but it is not so correct.

2. Real derivation theory: induction

Assume that the appropriate fact can be established in science, and now facing the issues that scientific knowledge is derived from those facts.

Logic (interpretation reasoning) can only reveal what is obtained from existing theoretical statements. It has the nature of preservation, but it is not possible to obtain new theoretical knowledge.The new theory is obtained by inductive law. It surpasses what is included in the premise.For example, the turkey was fed by the owner at 9 consecutive months, and the owner will always be fed at 9 o’clock, but it will be cut off the throat before Christmas.

The facts obtained by observation → induction → law and theory → interpretation → foreseeable

Inducticists believe that induction can be used as a reliable foundation for scientific theory.

A good induction argument must be satisfied: large observations, observation under various conditions, any acceptable observation should not conflict with the law of export.

The three are also suspected to be guaranteed.Sumulatoryism is a problem, and the biggest problem is that there will always be exceptions.

Third, fakeism

Karl Poper jumped out of ‘science that is engaged in actual derivation, the better the facts, the better, the better, the more because the science theory is proven.’The theory of unable to withstand observation and experimental tests must be eliminated, and other speculative conjectures are replaced.

He believes that Marxism and Freudists are not science, because they are so flexible that they are confirmed on the surface, but in fact they cannot explain anything because they cannot be ruled out.

He directly acknowledged that scientific theory is not equivalent to the truth, adopting relativism, scientific theory is constantly perfected, and constantly approaching the truth.At the same time, it is a scientific theory with proven pseudo -pseudo.

Bold guesses of confirmation, cautious guesses of evidence for false.

Foresters pay more attention to progress rather than truth.

limitation:

Reality is often dramatic: observation of the conclusion of theory is impossible.When the evidence of observation and experiments is conflict with the theoretical foreseen, the error may be evidence rather than theory.It may be that a black swan can deny that all the swans are white, but the situation that may appear in reality is that you read it wrong. The black swan is just wearing a layer of black clothes.

For example: Ri Xin said that the size of Venus Mars has been unchanged (at that time, it is the same as the naked eye). If the earth is rotating, why the loose objects are not thrown out, and why the stones that fall from the high place have not fallen in the back position behind.Essence

If pseudo -pseudo -proof is strictly observed, the recognized excellent theories will be abandoned in the bud state.(For example, the day of the heart)

Early expressions of the new theory are persistently developed to those superficial proofs and pseudo -ignorance.

The emergence of forestism is to emphasize scientific critical elements. However, although it is recommended to be relentlessly criticized, dogmaticism also plays an important role. Once this is the case, what else can be eliminated?

Fourth, the theory of structure i: Kun’s paradigm

The key point of Kun’s theoretical is to emphasize the revolutionary nature of scientific progress. The revolution here means abandoning a theoretical structure and replacing it with another incompatible theoretical structure.

Pre-science — Conventional Science — Crisis — Revolution — New conventional science — New Revolution

A group of scientists work within a relatively mature theoretical framework, and constantly replenish them until large loopholes appear, and some scientists (may be old or young) will develop a new theoretical framework to explain the new phenomenon.At the beginning of the new framework, it is incomplete. It may have more loopholes than the previous framework. When it is continuously worked hard to improve it better than the previous theoretical framework, the revolution is successful, and it becomes a new framework for the new framework.

Now pay attention to the occurrence of crisis and what happened during the revolution, such as the time when the heart is speaking with the sun.One scientist will choose to say because of the simplicity of mathematics characteristics, and the other is attracted by its legislation. The third one refuses to say that it is engaged in the research on Earth’s mechanics.Reject Cordinism because of religious factors.

limitation:

(I don’t know how to write this, probably write it.) This theory cannot solve why science is better than other ideology and culture. It acknowledges that physical and cultural students have their problems, but this is the same as astrology.And everyone has excluded the so -called relativism.Essence

Fifth, theoretical theory II: The research program

It’s troublesome, don’t write this anymore, as there are problems as above.This part is Lakosz’s thought.

6. Faya’s anarchist science theory

The story so far: Empiratists believe that science is engaged in derivation, but the facts are dependent on theory and is wrong.The defect of the fakeism is that the reason why science cannot determine the wrong foresee is whether there is a problem with the theory, or to observe that there is a problem.Kun and Rakasus could not clarify the progress and superiority of science, and the latter bluntly said that the standard of science is so loose that it can only rule out very few intelligence pursuits.

After seeing these, Feiya said: Our society has given a scientific lofty status, but it is presumed that it is better than Marxism, better than black witchcraft and vulgarism, and cannot be defended.Respecting science is a dangerous dogma.

He opposes that the school requires that each child is to learn science, because it was like asking children to learn religion before.Respect the degree of freedom.Without the so -called scientific methods, scientists should follow subjective desires.

Exclusive to oppose methods: Galileo’s things.

Sumulators believe that Galileo’s success lies in the fact that observed the facts can be taken seriously.However, in fact Galileo adopted a lot of ideological experiments and rationally defeated the senses.Galileo used a telescope to observe pure naked eye. Before that, people completely believed in the perfection of human senses.In order to persuade those who oppose the information of the telescope, Galileo only asked for help with the argument, and also used propaganda and strategies.

(The so -called so -called standards and regulations are not universal and eternal and correct, and it is suitable for all historical stages of all scientific and scientific development).)

Criticism: It seems because he is too free and naive.

Seven, Bayeste entered the road

8. New experimentalism

Nine, why should the world obey the law?

10. Realism and anti -realism

If you are interested in seeing yourself, my interest has been worn by the difficulties and complexity of the problem.And this book has not mentioned the history of quantum mechanics …

Conclusion: The author bluntly stated that in a sense, what is science is misleading? Science is constantly developing and changing, and it is impossible to give a universal and accurate scientific outlook.It was just a long time ago, what kind of development and changes have been reappeared through some examples a long time ago.