Journal Entry #2: Scientific Realism

Often in arguments regarding the authenticity or reality of a concept, we hear the omniscient words "scientifically proven". Somehow, the moment these words are uttered, they silence all sceptics as if they have been proven wrong, as if the scientific evidence is sufficient in proving the truth and revealing the reality. This, at the most general level, outlines the idea of scientific realism.

Should we rely purely on science? It can be argued that all of our intellectual knowledge is just passed onto us from secondary sources whether they are teachers, books, scientists, parents or peers. Often these theories are biased – intended to win us over, and rely on different theories that are well known and established in society. We learn of Newton and Einstein throughout our primary years of education but we never take into consideration the influence that other scientists have had on them to allow them to derive their theory. Very often, well established theories can only work as models for society, but will never replicate a real life situation. For example, computer algorithms try to derive the closest possible replicas to real life situations. The scientific knowledge that we gain is ultimately knowledge that has been passed down and refined for years and years. Is it right for us to rely on this knowledge? If we don’t rely on these scientific ideas and theories, then there’s little else for us to rely on.