According to deGrasse Tyson:
Once a scientific truth emerges from a consensus of experiments and observations it is the way of the world.Colbert (a philosophy major) responds by raising a philosophical question about the methodology of science:
But is the science in on science?In other words, even if deGrasse Tyson is right about the way scientific truths are established, one could still ask whether that way of establishing scientific truth is any good. Well, is it?
deGrasse Tyson's terminology is off but not entirely wrong.
ReplyDeleteScientific facts, not truths, are established by a consensus of specialists in the applicable area. This consensus changes from time to time, thus facts change. The changes are not necessarily evolutionary for the better. For example, just check the history of the number of planets. At one time, it was 47.
Steve G.
Thanks for your comment, Steve.
DeleteI think you raise interesting points that are worth examining further. You say that “scientific facts are established by a consensus” among experts. To use your example, astronomers used to agree with the following:
(1) The number of planets in the solar system is nine.
Now they would agree with the following:
(2) The number of planets in the solar system is eight.
So, is it that (1) used to be, but no longer is, a fact about our solar system? Or is it that astronomers thought that (1) is a fact about our solar system but now they think that (2) is a fact about our solar system? In other words, in what sense do “facts change” (as opposed to what we think are facts)?