Logan+Week+1

Science is and always has been all around us. No one ever fully comprehends or understands science and I believe that is why our knowledge of the subject is always growing. Halwes states, “Nobody really understands science and why it works so amazingly well -- but many people are trained to believe that they do understand it (or at least that somebody does), and that they should pass these beliefs along to their students.” I strongly agree to this statement because science overlaps and interconnects in so many ways. When we are taught as students, we automatically assume that what is being taught is true and correct. What we think we understand isn’t necessarily true or misleading. According to Halwes, the concept of what science is and how an understanding of it can often be misunderstood. In his article, he addresses some of the common myths of science.
 * Response to: Dispelling Some Common Myths about Science**

Halwes states that one common myth of science is that, “Scientists obtain Scientific Knowledge by following The Scientific Method, a uniquely powerful tool for understanding Reality.” I believe that scientific knowledge is any knowledge that explains the way the world in which we live in works but it does not have to be explained by “The Scientific Method.” Halwes argues that the “Scientific Method” that we are all taught as the only tool to understanding science is misleading and false. Knowledge is known through observation or observations and conclusions of others. I think that the reason why the scientific method is often considered as the only way to obtain new scientific knowledge is due to the fact that there must be an orderly way of explaining and showing evidence so that some such phenomenon is true. If this documentation can be done, then this newfound knowledge can be taught to others. So in one sense, having an organized method can prove useful in the end.

On the other hand, “What appears to [the working scientist] as the essence of the situation is that he is not consciously following any prescribed course of action, but feels complete freedom to utilize any method or device whatever which in the particular situation before him seems likely to yield the correct answer.” The “scientific method” is thought to be a logically stepped method in order to discover and support a scientific idea. Halwes disagrees with this fact and says that scientists use no unique method. I believe the phrase “there is a method to my madness” is relevant here. When scientists are in pursuit of discovery or knowledge they all follow their own “method” in order to get there, even if it is not logical. That is why it is unique.

Another common myth that Halwes states is that, “Scientific Knowledge is a new type of knowledge, superior to common sense and all other types of non-scientific beliefs.” There is no difference in scientific and ordinary knowledge. I believe that people think of science as a different type of knowledge because of the way it categorizes knowledge. They are both information, the topics that the cover can be different. However, where scientific knowledge differs is when compared to religious knowledge. If you compare the way information is obtained between the two, it is different. Scientific is based on fact and observation whereas religious is based on faith.

Most scientific knowledge that we know and understand is based on previous knowledge and common sense. “Our understanding of ourselves and our world, and our understanding of science itself, retains an unknown quantity of pre-scientific beliefs and practices which have never been studied scientifically and are //assumed// to be more or less true and workable.” All scientific knowledge, whether it is simple or complex, is improved upon by what we already know. If the advances in science in one generation disappeared before the next could learn from it, then we would never be so technologically advanced today.

Halwes final myth is, “Scientific Knowledge can only be developed by professional scientists.” Of course when you think of who creates the science that we know, you would think of nothing else but a scientist. However, Halwes disagrees with this. “Even with such a broad definition of the term "scientist," the process of developing a scientific understanding of a phenomenon or principle extends beyond the community of scientists per se.” After reading Halwes point, I believe that a “scientist” can be considered as anyone that can observe reality and conclude something from it, whether it is true or not. Common events or insignificant happenings during our lives can be observed by the average person too. They can then create a scientific understanding just as a typical “scientist” would.

I thought Halwes made a good statement about the future science. “As more and more people gain access to high quality information about science, this process becomes more and more efficient. Who knows what effect the World Wide Web will have, as it fosters discussion (and participation) by any interested people, and makes self training in practically any discipline steadily easier.” I agree that when more and more well explained scientific information is published, it can make understanding topics easier. This information can also help speed up the process of understanding scientific phenomenon and information. One of the great things about recorded scientific knowledge is that, as students, we can learn these topics without having to go through the whole process of discovering and proving it again. The point Halwes is trying to make is that professional scientists and teachers make it possible for students to engage in such topics that are at the brink of today’s science. Further down the road these students will be working on the same topics that they were once learning about. Now there are better ways of measuring and recording complex scientific phenomenon. Ideas that once used to be thought true are now being revised or even rid of. What we know and what we thought we knew is always being improved on. This is how knowledge and technology can advance as a human race.