The AskPhilosophers logo.

Science

People suppose that hard science is more objective than other subjects such as psychology. But doesn't science require good instincts, judgment, and intuition like any other field does? People say well all the scientists agree that global warming will have a big impact on the world but how can I really be so sure that it's as simple as "science sees it some way so it must be correct?" Isn't it just an unfounded prejudice that scientific judgements can be validated in some essentially simple and uncomplicated way?
Accepted:
June 25, 2011

Comments

Miriam Solomon
July 9, 2011 (changed July 9, 2011) Permalink

You are asking a few questions here. One is whether you should take it on trust (or authority) that scientists are in agreement on a scientific questions such as global warming. Another is whether or not assessing scientific evidence is "simple" (and I think you are right in suggesting that it is not simple). And a third is whether or not science is "objective" (a complicated question that philosophers of science, as well as scientists, often debate). A final question you may be asking is whether physics or climate science is more "objective" or "simpler" than psychology or other social sciences, again a complicated question that there is no general agreement on.

  • Log in to post comments
Source URL: https://askphilosophers.org/question/4127
© 2005-2025 AskPhilosophers.org