Summary
Highlights
The word "scientist" didn't exist in English until William Whewell coined it in 1834. Prior to this, individuals like Isaac Newton were known as "Natural Philosophers."
There has always been debate about distinguishing scientists from philosophers and defining the scientific method. Early philosophers often distrusted observation, advocating for rational deduction, a view challenged by discoveries like Einstein's General Theory of Relativity.
Thomas Kuhn, in 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,' noted that scientists often operate within "paradigms" and are reluctant to abandon them, even with contradictory evidence. However, science progresses through inevitable "Paradigm Shifts."
A key difference of the scientific method is its reliance on observations. Unlike the dogmatic acceptance of figures like Aristotle, science requires open debate and the constant challenge of hypotheses through experimentation, as exemplified by Ibn al-Haytham centuries ago.
Karl Popper proposed "falsifiability" as the demarcation line between science and pseudoscience. A scientific hypothesis must be capable of being proven wrong by observation, unlike an unfalsifiable hypothesis such as the 'invisible demon' example.
There is ongoing debate about the validity and application of falsifiability, particularly concerning social sciences and theories that are both deemed unfalsifiable and yet have contradictory evidence.
Quantum Physics highlights a philosophical dilemma: it provides accurate predictions but multiple interpretations of reality. Occam's Razor, which favors theories with fewer assumptions, often fails to distinguish between such interpretations, leading to questions about whether science's role is to describe reality or solely make predictions.