Most of us believe that something is true because we are taught such at home, in school, or by some expert authority. For science, the truth is judged mostly by evaluating the experimental evidence; the more evidence supporting an accepted viewpoint or theory, the greater is the certainty that it really is true. Thus, scientists work to test and establish what we can regard as being true. A truth that is bonafide will be consistent with other observations and experimental data, and enables valid predictions to be made; an apparent truth that really is false does not have these two cardinal characteristics.
History is full of examples where some very widely accepted truth, idea, or dogma was later proven to be false, either in whole or in part. Testing hypotheses and re-examining accepted conclusions or established theories is a large part of the ongoing job of scientists. Research scientists openly question all truths, theories, and dogmas. Thomas Edison, the very famous inventor (see my recent post on “Inventors and Scientists”), is quoted as having often said, “I accept almost nothing dealing with electricity without thoroughly testing it first” . Nevertheless, research scientists, just like all other people, must accept many provisional truths in order to be able to move forward with daily life both at home and in the laboratory; this general acceptance that yesterday continues into today and then on into tomorrow is a very strong practical necessity.
There are plenty of controversies in both classical and modern science. In biomedicine, there are long-debated opposing theories about what actually is the essential nature of cancer (i.e., neoplasia). In chemistry, there are still-ongoing disputes about the detailed structure of water. In physics, there are large disagreements about the existence, genesis, and properties of certain fundamental subatomic particles and forces. These major controversies are both very important and very difficult targets for modern researchers. There also are numerous smaller disputes and arguments being generated all the time. Having all these controversies and disagreements in science is very good because they force research scientists to continue to explore, to think analytically about alternative explanations, to doubt and wonder “what if ?”, and, to be able to ask unconventional questions.
For ordinary people (i.e., non-scientists), daily life usually goes on without encountering many changes in the accepted truths. Nevertheless, it must be understood that what is regarded as being true today can change tomorrow as a result of new research results. Scientists and other scholars (e.g., archeologists, economists, historians, museum directors, paleontologists, statisticians, etc.) as professional questioners of the truth, will advise us about some perceived need to modify our current beliefs as a result of new research findings. To be certain, any new proposals, unexpected research results, and unconventional interpretations always remain doubted and debated until more extensive evidence can be piled up. Changes in what we have long regarded as being true should not be feared, since these will increase our grasp of reality; it is ignorance and dogmas that should be feared. The discovery of new truths by scientific research can create new concepts, new assumptions, and new insights, thereby causing progress in the extent of our knowledge and understanding.
 Beals, G., 1999. The biography of Thomas Edison. Available on the internet at: http://www.thomasedison.com/biography.html .
BACK TO HOME PAGE OR SCROLL UP TO MENU UNDER
THE WEBSITE TITLE