Question

How does the scientific method aid human critical reasoning processes? How and why have you made assumptions or inferences on important matters, regardless of data or evidence to the contrary? Examples here might include: fad diets, telepathy, precognition, psychokinesis, vaccinations, UFOs, magnetic therapy, apparitions, cold fusion, Bigfoot, alternative forms of medicines, genetically modified plants, etc. Describe how you have thought about this issue and analyze how you could improve your critical reasoning on this issue using the scientific method.

Answer 1

Note: This response is in UK English, please paste the response to MS Word and you should be able to spot discrepancies easily. You may elaborate the answer based on personal views or your classwork if necessary.

(Answer) “Scientific methodology” is a process that entails collecting data, analysing it, testing the data under an experimental circumstance and then analysing the results. The conclusion is generally based on the results of the experiment. In this way, a hypothesis can be proved or disproved based on logic and sure evidence.

However, human beings tend to also incline themselves towards notions and ideologies that do not have scientifically sound evidence. Let us assume the story of “Bigfoot” for instance. As a child, it can be challenging to not believe in Sasquatch who might just be lurking in one’s closed. As it is with children and their make-believe monsters, in most cases, a non-scientific belief is based on extreme emotions like fear.

Another example might be something like a weather forecast. Certain meteorologists might have the most scientific logic in predicting the coming weather. They will refer to data, test the waters, extrapolate information and announce a coming storm. Yet people might not be entirely afraid or take precautions simply because experience demands them so. In the past weather experts have been wrong about the coming rains and why should they have accurate predictions now. Climate can be predicted as that is about cumulative data. However, a single bout of rain or an isolated storm might defer from scientific data. Here, past experience has led people to disbelieve logical evidence.

In order to improve critical reasoning, the analysis must be scientific and have viable research. Secondly, the process must be non-bias and entirely objective. Lastly, the process must also consider historical patterns of similar situations in order to get the most comprehensive results.