Jump to content
Culture Citizen

Why do scientists believe things?

Recommended Posts

I'm not sure that "believe" is the best word to describe how scientists think of their findings. Rather, they develop understandings of the topics they investigate. These understandings are not absolutes, but are provisional. They are descriptions of what, based on the available evidence, seem to be the best explanation for all the related observations and tests and analyses. As more information becomes available then the understandings may change, be completely abandoned, or become the established view - but a view that can always be changed in future, with new data, or a new perspective on the old.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Culture Citizen said:

Given the nature of Science and its practice, why do scientists believe things?

 

In another thread I have just written

Quote

Studiot

All this seems now to be going well beyond the original posted question, which I believe I have answered within the specified number systems (which do not go as far a C).

 

Is there anything wrong with this belief ?

In true scientific manner I am quite prepared to be shown to be wrong about my belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because that is the nature of knowledge and truth itself. It is belief. "I know that this is an object", you believe it is an object because without thinking about it much because you been taught in school about it being an object and you being active in "knowing" something. To know is to believe, to state what is true is to believe. We know nothing, things just exist. More philosophy answer I guess. I ain't no scientist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scientists are human, and humans have both rational and irrational thought processes 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Culture Citizen said:

I suggest you both re-read the title and think in the General.

 

The only General I can think of as a result of your post is General Stanley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Saiyan300Warrior said:

We know nothing...

I'm going to have to ask you to speak for yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate agreeing with Swansont, but:

Look into why people who believe things believe things and that will probably be pretty much the reason why scientists who believe things believe things.

Scientists are not a different species.

Nevertheless, scientists seem to be more demanding when it comes to believing something.

Edited by joigus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I'm going to have to ask you to speak for yourself.

Ex. "I know that zapatos is a cool name" - "I know" - self doing the act of knowing, "that zapatos is a cool name" - description of what the self is knowing. So really if you think about it, we know nothing because knowledge implies truth and truth is just a belief concept that we decide for. All this "evidence and schmancy pancy empirical data bla bla bla" can be broken down to the self doing the act of knowing, truth is, everything simply is. We live in a world of ideas due to being built with a brain I believe and the ones we usually raise with utmost value are the "beliefs" (knowledge that we consider true), you get what I'm sayin'?

Edited by Saiyan300Warrior

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Saiyan300Warrior said:

we know nothing because knowledge implies truth and truth is just a belief concept that we decide for.

That doesn't mean anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, zapatos said:

That doesn't mean anything.

But it does old sport, you see if you believe in something then you think something is true, that is the knowledge I am referring to, the "I know" as a prefix to any given sentence. It certainly does old sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saiyan300Warrior said:

if you believe in something then you think something is true

That's not the way it works though, is it? You can actually believe something without investing it with "truth" or even "certainty". I can believe there might be a way for consciousness to exist after death, but I don't have to be certain of it to believe in it. It's more of a hope or wishful thought. 

Or I can study a subject in depth, learn everything there is to know about it, and be almost certain about what I believe about that subject. At a certain point, our wish/hope becomes trust. I think scientists try hard to trust their knowledge before believing in things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, swansont said:

Scientists are human...

Yes.

5 hours ago, swansont said:

...humans have both rational and irrational thought processes 

No. Humans have an emotional capacity that facilitates a great range of behavior. You believe things as you need emotional investment in something for it to have relevance to you. ((Your answer, joigus.))

 

5 hours ago, studiot said:

 

The only General I can think of as a result of your post is General Stanley.

Yes, I anticipated you would think along such lines. You refer to some Popcul thing?

 

**The negative rating by 'someone' I interpret as 'someone's pussy hurts'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good scientist doesn't believe anything, literally.
However, even someone like Studiot will occasionally substitute 'have good evidence for' with 'believe".

That's the human part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Culture Citizen said:

**The negative rating by 'someone' I interpret as 'someone's pussy hurts'.

What is the matter with you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Culture Citizen said:
12 hours ago, studiot said:

 

The only General I can think of as a result of your post is General Stanley.

Yes, I anticipated you would think along such lines. You refer to some Popcul thing?

Does G & S mean nothing to someone with your handle  ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Culture Citizen said:

I suggest you both re-read the title and think in the General.

My response to the OP was about as general as they come. I suggest, if it failed to meet your expectation, that you restate your question, bringing some clarity to it - assuming you actually want an answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Culture Citizen said:

Yes.

No. Humans have an emotional capacity that facilitates a great range of behavior. You believe things as you need emotional investment in something for it to have relevance to you.

I don’t see how this is in disagreement with my response.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
!

Moderator Note

Since the thread is not going into a positive direction it is locked for now. Also note that we do not tolerate slurs against any groups.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.