Thread: The Scientific Method - Why Science is Truth

I agree with you, Onus, but I would avoid the term "Truth." That is a pretty loaded term as people have already pointed out. I'm sure you could come up with a more appropriate term (assuming this wasn't your whole point to begin with, you instigator ).

Science still relies on observation, which is severely limited and subjective. While we are always improving our ability to observe, we will never be able to come close to absolute truth. However limited it may be, I agree it is currently the best system available for us to use in our endless pursuit of truth.

I think people often underestimate the importance of the very first steps of the scientific method. "Define the question" and "form a hypothesis" seem to be the limiting tasks in science right now. These initial steps are often the most difficult, and the most reliant on our human bias and beliefs. This is also the time for the looneys, the believers, and the fringe thinkers to throw out every possible idea, no matter how crazy. Then, we can look for ways to prove or disprove it (and throw it back in their faces ). I see too many self proclaimed scientists who are seemingly annoyed when people come up with unproven ideas. It seems like they are somehow insulted by ideas. It has to be an idea before it can become science. I think we need the believers, the fringe thinkers, the charlatans and the crazies. They pose the questions, and dare science to prove them wrong.

Originally Posted by Robot_Butler

I agree with you, Onus, but I would avoid the term "Truth." That is a pretty loaded term as people have already pointed out. I'm sure you could come up with a more appropriate term (assuming this wasn't your whole point to begin with, you instigator ).

~