Post by auntym on Jan 10, 2015 14:32:08 GMT -6
medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/the-burden-of-proof-860df13ce9e1
The burden of proof
If a scientific theory can never be “100% proven,” how can we know what’s true?
“Never waste your time trying to explain who you are to people who are committed to misunderstanding you.” -Dream Hampton
Perhaps no word in the English language generates as much misunderstanding as the word theory. In scientific circles, this word has a very specific meaning that’s different from everyday use, and — as a theoretical astrophysicist myself — I feel it’s my duty to help explain exactly what we mean when we use it.
And in this particular context, I want you to think about the claims that because a scientific theory can never be 100% proven, we can never know for certain whether it’s true or not. Is it wrong to say something isn’t, therefore, real or true because we don’t have 100% proof?
Let’s consider this. Let’s start by thinking about how impossible it is to, for example, prove a negative.
This does not mean that all things ought to be taken as true, even in the absence of evidence.
What this sentiment echoes — from a scientific perspective — is that if you want to validate or invalidate a theory, you have to put the explicit-and-unique predictions arising from that hypothesis to the test.
But let’s back up a little more and define what I mean by theory, because when I use that word, I mean something very particular, and it’s likely different from what you think of when you use it.
CONTINUE READING: medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/the-burden-of-proof-860df13ce9e1
The burden of proof
If a scientific theory can never be “100% proven,” how can we know what’s true?
“Never waste your time trying to explain who you are to people who are committed to misunderstanding you.” -Dream Hampton
Perhaps no word in the English language generates as much misunderstanding as the word theory. In scientific circles, this word has a very specific meaning that’s different from everyday use, and — as a theoretical astrophysicist myself — I feel it’s my duty to help explain exactly what we mean when we use it.
And in this particular context, I want you to think about the claims that because a scientific theory can never be 100% proven, we can never know for certain whether it’s true or not. Is it wrong to say something isn’t, therefore, real or true because we don’t have 100% proof?
Let’s consider this. Let’s start by thinking about how impossible it is to, for example, prove a negative.
This does not mean that all things ought to be taken as true, even in the absence of evidence.
What this sentiment echoes — from a scientific perspective — is that if you want to validate or invalidate a theory, you have to put the explicit-and-unique predictions arising from that hypothesis to the test.
But let’s back up a little more and define what I mean by theory, because when I use that word, I mean something very particular, and it’s likely different from what you think of when you use it.
CONTINUE READING: medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/the-burden-of-proof-860df13ce9e1