What is the scientific method and how does it work?

Without science we would not have reached the current level of development. Thanks to the scientific method, humanity has been creating great medical and technological advances, and even the field of psychology, an aspect of reality that seemed too confused and ambiguous to be analyzed, has been developed to the point of allowing us to know well what is behind our actions and thoughts.

What is the importance of the scientific method?

Nevertheless, What is the real reason why science has such prestige? Where exactly does its value lie? And why is it necessary to use the scientific method for science to progress?

 I will try to shed some light on the matter at hand starting at the root of the matter: the birth of science.

The origins of science and its epistemology

During the 6th century, in Ionia (a part of ancient Greece located in present-day Turkey), a world full of mysteries was presented to the Hellenes. The starting point was a situation of almost total uncertainty, but little by little, from the observation of nature,

the ideas of an ordered and rational Universe, susceptible of being analyzed.

At first, a good part of the Greeks believed that reality was made up of a matter composed of an essence that was barely known. knowledge, governed by the action of equal and opposite forces that were kept in dramatic struggle, always remaining in an eternal Balance. At that historical moment and from these concepts arises a primitive science (or proto-science, for rather than experimenting, he theorized) properly Greek.

The Renaissance brings the paradigm shift

It was not until the 16th century, with the arrival of the Renaissance in Europe, that a qualitative leap began in scientific-technical knowledge that would culminate in the 18th century AD. C. with Enlightenment.

In this scientific revolution, many medieval prejudices that already dragged (some) from the antiquity, and a concrete and effective method to find out the truth was consolidated: the scientific method, which it would allow us to examine all aspects of nature in the best possible way.

And why "scientific"?

Science and its method were not arrived at by chance, but by survival. Primitive human civilization was always challenged by catastrophes of great magnitude (wars, floods, epidemics, etc.) that They required a protocol that could give us reliability in the production of new knowledge to be able to face these adversities satisfactorily.

Thanks to the scientific method we could abandon the eternal paralysis produced by not understanding what is happening or what may happen in the future, because we began to have good reasons to think that something is false or true... although, ironically speaking, doubting is part of the scientific method and the skeptical spirit that accompanies. In the words of the American physicist Robert Oppenheimer:

"A scientist must take the liberty of raising any question, of doubting any statement, of correcting errors."

The role of the brain

But it is not only catastrophes that are the cause of the scientific method. One of the reasons for its birth is none other than our ability to reason, a miracle of evolution that enables us to avoid and resolve errors of logic, cognitive biases and errors in perception. In short, we can see the logic of things because our brain structured in a way that allows us to examine premises and arguments looking for consistency and coherence in them.

However, as relatively instinctive and emotional animals that we are, the level of cognitive abilities necessary to be absolutely skeptical and rational (someone who knows how to recognize and perfectly order ideas and theories to detect defects in them) is impossible even for the most cultured and intelligent people. That is why science is, in part, a shared project based on the consensus of many experts. and specialists offering their different points of view.

Scientific procedure

From what has been said above, it follows that science is not made by four geniuses or enlightened in a way individual (the opposite would be to make scientific knowledge rely entirely on a fallacy of authority). Conversely, is the result of a collective cooperation: the so-called scientific community.

Scientific knowledge builds on previous knowledge, investing decades of research during which numerous experiments are carried out (the test of double-blind, for example) and hypotheses and theories are proposed. In fact, scientific procedure is so and so collective that scientists often ask their professional colleagues (the scientific community) to review possible errors in their studies (even if this implies that their alleged discoveries are denied). This has the advantage that the more scientists investigating, the more likely it is to find errors in previous investigations and conclusions..

Pursuing scientific objectivity

It is clear that absolute objectivity does not exist even in the hard sciences, but that does not mean that it cannot be taken as a reference or an ideal. That is why another of the pragmatic characteristics of scientific procedure is to delegate responsibilities in the research and hypothesis development in assistant scientists who are not emotionally involved in the draft.

This ensures greater objectivity; essential characteristic of all science. These assistant scientists repeat the experiments and compare and analyze the information obtained., because any statement or sentence that claims to have the infallible seal of scientific quality must be able to be refuted or demonstrated by someone outside the project.

Would anyone believe a doctor who claims to have found the gift of immortality without giving the option for others to check if he is right? In a way it is a matter of common sense.

The role of the media

The media have a great importance in the scientific evolution. When television, for example, tells us that researchers from a university have actually discovered something that they want to express (perhaps in an unpedagogical way) is that said investigation is far from finished, because its conclusions must be subject to repeated checks before having a good level of acceptance.

It is at this point that other colleagues in the profession must verify the accuracy of such claims. After an exhaustive selection and a correct arbitration, if the study is still valid, it will be considered that the Empirical evidence in favor of the hypothesis that has been put forward is robust and serves to explain well a phenomenon.

In this way humanity will have advanced one more step. This step may need to be revised in the future to continue advancing, since the scientific method always leaves the door open to a reformulation of theories; the opposite would be to fall into a dogma.

Pseudosciences, sciences that are not really

Unfortunately, we sometimes make the mistake of making pseudoscientific hypotheses, that as they are raised cannot be worked through the scientific method.

And what is a pseudoscience? Pseudoscience is a belief or practice that is presented as science but does not follow a reliable scientific method, ergo can not be verified. It is usually characterized by ambiguous, contradictory and unspecific statements where the use of fallacies and exaggerations is the order of the day.

In pseudosciences there is a dependence on confirmation but never on proof of refutation, for not talk about the null willingness to collaborate with the scientific community so that it can evaluate the situation. In short, if we sometimes fall into pseudoscientific propositions unintentionally, let's imagine what level of development we would have if our knowledge about nature was only based on this type of affirmations. It is in this comparison that all the value of science lies: in its usefulness.