Overview
Chapter 2 of our text provides you with the atomic theory of matter and begins to explore the modern structure of the atom. Our knowledge of the atom was built over many years of study. In this discussion we explore, more about hypotheses, theories, truth.
Can a theory be proven “true?” For scientists, the word theory holds more power than its meaning in everyday vernacular. Often times today the words “theory” and “opinion” are treated as virtual synonyms, with the underlying idea that neither need be substantiated outside of the whim of the individual holding the particular point of view. However, when used in the scientific community, the term “theory” does in fact connote an idea that has already undergone the scrutiny and refining process of the scientific method, and as such, had been thoroughly vetted by the scientific community. A scientific “theory” therefore is the product of countless experiments and often holds predictive power for further studies.
For example, John Dalton proposed the atomic theory that simply states, “all matter is composed of atoms.” This is a fundamental theory in chemistry and a starting place for all chemical experimentation. Yet, we still must ask, is this theory free from bias? Is it fundamentally a statement of truth?
At the heart of these questions is an even deeper one. How should we view science? Traditionally, science has been seen as a progression of thought. Little by little, another piece of the puzzle fits and supports the reigning theory of the day. As scientists observe the world around them, they are able to gradually refine their theories and science progresses. In fact, theories may become so fine-tuned that they are able to represent an accurate model of nature. We will call this the incremental view.
A view that is fairly new to the scientific world was popularized in a book written in 1964 by Thomas Kuhn entitled, The Structure of Scientific Revolution. This view challenged the incremental view by stating that science spends most of it time doing what Kuhn called “normal science.” This is the day-to-day laboratory work were scientists fit their discoveries into the commonly held theory of the time. However, over time, more and more exceptions to the theory emerge. At some point, the “truth” of the theory is questioned. This results in a scientific revolution, a paradigm shift, and a new reigning theory replaces the old. This new theory does not simply improve upon the previous one held, but often completely overhauls the perspective of the scientific community.
However, over time, more and more exceptions to the theory emerge. At some point, the “truth” of the theory is questioned. This results in a scientific revolution, a paradigm shift, and a new reigning theory replaces the old. This new theory does not simply improve upon the previous one held, but often completely overhauls the perspective of the scientific community.
Instructions
For your initial thread, please answer the following questions and explain your reasoning:
- Give an example of a scientific development that illustrates Kuhn’s idea of scientific revolutions and explain how it represents this idea.
- Give an example of the incremental view of scientific development and explain how it represents this idea.
- Do you think scientific development follows Kuhn’s view or the incremental view? Justify your answer.
- Can scientific knowledge be considered true? As you answer this question, discuss hypotheses and theories and how they fit into scientific knowledge.
*Note: I am using Chemistry: the central science by Brown
ASSIGNMENT COMPLETED AT https://capitalessaywriting.com
MAKE YOUR ORDER AND GET THE COMPLETED ORDER
Hypotheses, Theories, and Truth
(Course Instructor)
(University Affiliation)
(Student’s Name)
(Date)
Hypotheses, Theories, and Truth
Example of Scientific Development
The development in science proceeds in two steps as outlined by Thomas Kuhn in his work on scientific revolution. According to (Brown, 2015) Kuhn’s scientific revolution proceeds in a numbers of steps that begin from what he termed “normal science” and ends in paradigm shift, where there is development of new approaches since the prior ones are considered inadequate or for solving current problems. The paradigm shift leads to development of new paradigms which are considered mode of instruction until new “crisis” arises that demands new paradigm. An example of a science revolution is the atomic theory.
In its early conception, Dalton provided an atomic theory that was considered revolutionary in the study of chemistry. The theory provided a remarkable way in which chemical reactions were viewed. In his theory, he proposed that elements were composed of tiny particles called atoms and that these atoms of same elements were identical and are of equal mass (Raymond, 2009). Moreover, Dalton proposed that atoms could not be divided, created or destroyed and that they combined in whole numbers. His theory was later challenged with the discovery of isotopes and chemical fusion and fission.
Dalton’s atomic theory represents Kuhn idea of scientific revolution because, the theory was initially accepted as a “normal science” and those who existed during his era employed his ideas. However, there came a shift when his ideas were challenged with the discovery of similar elements that had different masses and the possibility of breaking or combining atoms through fission and fusion. All the scientific developments created a new “paradigm shift” that altered the way atoms were viewed, leading to new ideas that replaced those proposed by Dalton.
Example of Incremental View of Scientific Development
In contrast to scientific revolutions, incremental view of scientific development occurs when existing theories are modified to make them more accurate. This occurs as scientists make observations and refine existing theoretical concepts adding new knowledge that makes them to have an accurate representation of the concept under study. An example of an incremental view of scientific development is the development of the periodic table of elements. The periodic table represents and arrangement of all known elements based on their properties (Joesten, Castellion & Hogg, 2007). According to the authors, Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev was the first scientist to attempt arrange of elements according to their atomic weights. This was based on 68 elements that had been discovered. However, new elements have continued to be discovered and an arrangement based on their properties has been developed over time. The development of periodic table represents incremental view of scientific development since it has led to refinement of classification of elements a……………………………………………………………………………………………………
ORDER YOUR COPY OF THE COMPLETED SOLUTION
ASSIGNMENT COMPLETED AT https://capitalessaywriting.comNO PLAGIARISM
