sravna
Well-known member
The endeavour of science is to find truths about nature in an objective manner. Objectivity is achieved by looking for actual evidence as proof of the theories proposed in the external world . But the question is how reliable are these evidences? Are they reliable enough to approve a hypothesis being proposed as part of body of knowledge?
The fact that a theory can be altered or even rejected in light of a different evidence contradicting it, is disconcerting to say the least. The basis for accepting something as part of knowledge is itself shaky.
As technology improves and enable us to more and more accurately perceive the physical reality, the possibility of new evidence rebutting the older ones increases.
Should be rely on such physical evidences which are untrustworthy and build our knowledge based on them? I do not think so. We need to move away from objectivity to subjectivity that can be trusted. I believe even the best technology cannot surpass the accuracy of perception of a very perceptive human mind. We only need to examine the logic of a theory proposed for correctness. I think this is not such a formidable task if we put real efforts in doing this.
So We should look for clarity of thoughts in a theory to approve it than looking for external evidence. Just as we examine only the logical proof for mathematical correctness so should be the case for example in physics too. Even f there is external evidence for supporting a theory it should not be accepted if it is logically flawed and vice versa.
The fact that a theory can be altered or even rejected in light of a different evidence contradicting it, is disconcerting to say the least. The basis for accepting something as part of knowledge is itself shaky.
As technology improves and enable us to more and more accurately perceive the physical reality, the possibility of new evidence rebutting the older ones increases.
Should be rely on such physical evidences which are untrustworthy and build our knowledge based on them? I do not think so. We need to move away from objectivity to subjectivity that can be trusted. I believe even the best technology cannot surpass the accuracy of perception of a very perceptive human mind. We only need to examine the logic of a theory proposed for correctness. I think this is not such a formidable task if we put real efforts in doing this.
So We should look for clarity of thoughts in a theory to approve it than looking for external evidence. Just as we examine only the logical proof for mathematical correctness so should be the case for example in physics too. Even f there is external evidence for supporting a theory it should not be accepted if it is logically flawed and vice versa.