Difference between revisions of "Paleoscience"
From Conservapedia
m (internal link) |
(→Paleoscience, worldview of the scientists, sociological and psychological factors, political pressure: adding example:) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
== Paleoscience, worldview of the scientists, sociological and psychological factors, political pressure == | == Paleoscience, worldview of the scientists, sociological and psychological factors, political pressure == | ||
| − | Since paleosciences do not deal with direct observations of the [[Phenomena#Scientific phenomena|phenomena]] that took place in the unobservable past, but rather with their effects, they are sometimes referred to as [[historical science | historical sciences]].<ref name="Cleland"/> This differentiates them from [[empirical science | empirical science]] that primarily rely on the possibility to repeatedly conduct the [[experiment | experiment]].{{#tag:ref| The term paleoscience also correlates to [[origin science]] and/or [[historical science]]; and [[experimental science]] and/or [[empirical science]] to [[operation science]], respectively. |group=note}} As it is not possible to travel back in time and directly observe the past phenomena, paleosciences are dependent on assumptions that are in principle not absolutely ''verifiable''. Thus, the worldview of scientist, sociological and psychological considerations, and [[Academician Burdenko syndrome|political pressure]] might play a dominant role in the process of selection of these explanatory assumptions as well as when interpreting the current findings and observed effects of the past [[Phenomena#Scientific phenomena|phenomena]].{{#tag:ref| cf."...many of the factors of involved in scientific community's decision to accept or reject a hypothesis are based upon ''sociological'' and ''psychological'' considerations. ... It is important to keep in mind that nothing that I have said contravenes the tentative nature of the support offered by empirical evidence for a hypothesis, nor challenges the claim that many of the factors that play a ''central role'' in the acceptance of hypothesis are ''psychological'' and ''political''"<ref name="Cleland">{{Cite journal | + | Since paleosciences do not deal with direct observations of the [[Phenomena#Scientific phenomena|phenomena]] that took place in the unobservable past, but rather with their effects, they are sometimes referred to as [[historical science | historical sciences]].<ref name="Cleland"/> This differentiates them from [[empirical science | empirical science]] that primarily rely on the possibility to repeatedly conduct the [[experiment | experiment]].{{#tag:ref| The term paleoscience also correlates to [[origin science]] and/or [[historical science]]; and [[experimental science]] and/or [[empirical science]] to [[operation science]], respectively. |group=note}} As it is not possible to travel back in time and directly observe the past phenomena, paleosciences are dependent on assumptions that are in principle not absolutely ''verifiable''. Thus, the worldview of scientist,{{#tag:ref|cf.[[Horror of a unique position]]|group=note}} sociological and psychological considerations, and [[Academician Burdenko syndrome|political pressure]] might play a dominant role in the process of selection of these explanatory assumptions as well as when interpreting the current findings and observed effects of the past [[Phenomena#Scientific phenomena|phenomena]].{{#tag:ref| cf."...many of the factors of involved in scientific community's decision to accept or reject a hypothesis are based upon ''sociological'' and ''psychological'' considerations. ... It is important to keep in mind that nothing that I have said contravenes the tentative nature of the support offered by empirical evidence for a hypothesis, nor challenges the claim that many of the factors that play a ''central role'' in the acceptance of hypothesis are ''psychological'' and ''political''"<ref name="Cleland">{{Cite journal |
| author=Cleland, C.E. | | author=Cleland, C.E. | ||
| title=Methodological and Epistemic Differences between Historical Science and Experimental Science | | title=Methodological and Epistemic Differences between Historical Science and Experimental Science | ||
Revision as of 19:47, July 13, 2014
Paleoscience [note 1] is:
- according to [1] in plural all those scientific disciplines that deal with historical references. These include past-related topics in the fields of archeology, geology, further on paleontology, paleoanthropology etc.
- according to [2] in plural those branches of the natural environmental sciences that focus on the reconstruction and modeling of the past events rather than direct observation and experiment.
Contents
Paleoscience, worldview of the scientists, sociological and psychological factors, political pressure
Since paleosciences do not deal with direct observations of the phenomena that took place in the unobservable past, but rather with their effects, they are sometimes referred to as historical sciences.[3] This differentiates them from empirical science that primarily rely on the possibility to repeatedly conduct the experiment.[note 2] As it is not possible to travel back in time and directly observe the past phenomena, paleosciences are dependent on assumptions that are in principle not absolutely verifiable. Thus, the worldview of scientist,[note 3] sociological and psychological considerations, and political pressure might play a dominant role in the process of selection of these explanatory assumptions as well as when interpreting the current findings and observed effects of the past phenomena.[note 4]
Notes
- ↑ also (pal(a)eo(-)sciences); "paleo-" prefix means "very old; prehistoric"; Etymology from Ancient Greek: palaios: "old"
- ↑ The term paleoscience also correlates to origin science and/or historical science; and experimental science and/or empirical science to operation science, respectively.
- ↑ cf.Horror of a unique position
- ↑ cf."...many of the factors of involved in scientific community's decision to accept or reject a hypothesis are based upon sociological and psychological considerations. ... It is important to keep in mind that nothing that I have said contravenes the tentative nature of the support offered by empirical evidence for a hypothesis, nor challenges the claim that many of the factors that play a central role in the acceptance of hypothesis are psychological and political"[3]
References
- ↑ Freiburger Institut für Paläowissenschaftliche Studien (F.I.P.S.) (german). clio-online.de (2005). Retrieved on 2011-05-15.
- ↑ Benito, G., Gregory, K. J., 2003 Palaeohydrology: understanding global change. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, p.397
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Cleland, C.E. (September 2002). "Methodological and Epistemic Differences between Historical Science and Experimental Science" (PDF). Philosophy of Science 69: 474–496. http://spot.colorado.edu/~cleland/articles/Cleland.PS.Pdf. Retrieved 25.1.2012. "Insofar as they are concerned with identifying particular past causes of current phenomena, historical researches cannot directly test their hypotheses by means of controlled experiments.".
