Tutorial 1
Literature
Chapter 1. Introduction, Acquiring Knowledge, and the Scientific
Method
1.1 Methods of Knowing and Acquiring Knowledge
Methods of acquiring knowledge are ways in which a person can know things or
discover answers to questions. There are five nonscientific approaches:
• The method of tenacity → in this method, information is accepted as true
because it has always been believed or because superstition supports it.
o Habit leads us to continue believing something we have always believed.
Often this is referred to as belief perseverance.
• The method of intuition → in this method, information is accepted on the basis
of a hunch or “gut feeling”.
o With intuition, a person relies on hunches and “instinct” to answer
questions. When we have no information at all and cannot refer to
supporting data or use rational justification, we often resort to intuition.
• The method of authority → in this method, a person relies on information or
answers from an expert in the subject area.
o For many questions, the method of authority is an excellent starting point;
it is the quickest and easiest way to obtain answers. However, the method
of authority has some pitfalls. It does not always provide accurate
information. For example, authorities can be biased.
▪ Another limitation of the method of authority is that the answers
obtained from an expert could represent a subjective, personal
opinion rather than true expert knowledge.
▪ An additional limitation of this method is that we often assume that
expertise in one area can be generalized to other topics.
▪ Another pitfall of the method of authority is that people accept an
expert’s statement without question.
▪ As a final pitfall of the method of authority, realize that not all
“experts” are experts.
o The method of faith is a variant of the method of authority in which people
have unquestioning trust in the authority figure and, therefore, accept
information about the authority without doubt or challenge.
, • The rational method → this method, also known as rationalism, involves
seeking answers by logical reasoning. We begin with a set of known facts or
assumptions and use logic to reach a conclusion or get an answer to a question.
o In logical reasoning, premise statements describe facts or assumptions
that are presumed to be true.
o An argument is a set of premise statements that are logically combined to
yield a conclusion.
o The final sentence is a logical conclusion based on the premises. If the
premises statements are, in fact, true and the logic is sound, then the
conclusion is guaranteed to be correct. Thus, the answers obtained by the
rational method must satisfy the standards established by the rules of
logic before they are accepted as true.
• The method of empiricism → this method, uses observation or direct sensory
experience to obtain knowledge. This method is a product of the empirical
viewpoint in philosophy, which holds that all knowledge is acquired through the
senses.
o The empirical method is the practice of employing direct observation as a
source of knowledge. In the empirical method, evidence or observations
with one’s senses are required for verification of information. Note that the
observations can be casual and unplanned, such as when you are simply
aware of the world around you. At the other end of the continuum,
observations can be systematic and purposeful.
1.2 The Scientific Method
The scientific method is an approach to acquiring knowledge that involves formulating
specific questions and then systematically finding answers. The scientific method
contains many elements of the methods previously discussed.
,The steps of the scientific method:
1. Step 1: Observe behavior or other phenomena
The scientific method often begins with casual or informal observations. At this
stage in the process, people commonly tend to generalize beyond the actual
observations. The process of generalization is an almost automatic human
response known as induction, or inductive reasoning.
o Induction, or inductive reasoning, involves using a relatively small set of
observations as the basis for forming a general statement about a larger
set of possible observations.
2. Step 2: Form a tentative answer or explanation (a hypothesis)
This step in the process usually begins by identifying other factors, or variables,
that are associated with your observations. Variables are characteristics or
conditions that change or have different values for different individuals.
o In the context of science, a hypothesis is a statement that describes or
explains a relationship between or among variables. A hypothesis is not a
final answer but rather a proposal to be tested and evaluated.
3. Step 3: Use your hypothesis to generate a testable prediction
Usually, this step involves taking the hypothesis and applying it to a specific,
observable, real-world situation. We are using logic (rational method) to make the
prediction and this logical process known is as deduction. Deduction, or
deductive reasoning, uses a general statement as the basis for reaching a
conclusion about specific examples.
4. Step 4: Evaluate the prediction by making systematic, planned
observations
After a specific, testable prediction has been made (the rational method), the
next step is to evaluate the prediction using direct observation (the empirical
method). This is the actual research or data collection phase of the scientific
method.
o The goal is to provide a fair and unbiased test of the research hypothesis
by observing whether the prediction is correct.
5. Step 5: Use the observations to support, refute or refine the original
hypothesis
The final step of the scientific method is to compare the actual observations with
the predictions that were made from the hypothesis. To what extent do the
observations agree with the predictions?
o Some agreement indicates support for the original hypothesis and
suggests that you consider making new predictions and testing them. Lack
of agreement indicates that the original hypothesis was wrong or that the
hypothesis was used incorrectly, producing faulty predictions.
, In addition to the basic process that makes up the scientific method, a set of overriding
principles governs scientific investigation. Three important principles of the scientific
method are as follows:
1. It is empirical
When we say that science is empirical, we mean that answers are obtained by
making observations. Although preliminary answers or hypotheses may be
obtained by other means, science requires empirical verification.
2. It is public
The scientific method is public. By this we mean that the scientific method makes
observations available for evaluation by others, especially other scientists. In
particular, other individuals should be able to repeat the step-by-step process
that led to the observations so that they can replicate the observations for
themselves.
o Replication, or repetition of observation, allows verification of the findings.
3. It is objective
The scientific method is objective. That is, the observations are structured so that
the researcher’s biases and beliefs do not influence the outcome of the study.
Science has been called “a dispassionate search for knowledge”, meaning that
the researcher does not let personal feelings contaminate the observations.
Note that scientific research is based on gathering evidence from careful, systematic,
and objective observations. This is one of the primary features that differentiates
science from other, less rigorous disciplines known as pseudosciences.
Pseudoscience is a system of ideas often presented as science but actually lacking
some of the key components that are essential to scientific research. Theories such as
aromatherapy, astrology, and intelligent design are examples of pseudoscience that are
unsupported by empirical evidence.
• The following list presents come of the more important differences:
1. The primary distinction between science and pseudoscience is based on the
notion of testable and refutable hypothesis. Specifically, a theory is scientific
only if it can specify how it could be refuted. In pseudoscience, on the other
hand, the typical response to negative results is to discount them entirely or to
explain them away without altering the original theory.
2. Science demands an objective and unbiased evaluation of all the available
evidence. Pseudoscience, on the other hand, tends to rely on subjective
evidence such as testimonials and anecdotal reports of success.
