Toll free: 1(888)901-8312
Call us: 1(646)963-6686
Livechat
McAfee SECURE sites help keep you safe from identity theft, credit card fraud, spyware, spam, viruses and online scams
invite
Features
  • 24/7/365 avalibility
  • Direct communication with the writer
  • UK, US, Canadian, Australian writers
  • Free plagiarism scan service
  • Live chat & dedicated customer support service
  • 92% of satisfied returning customers
  • 100% Authenticity
live chat consultant
ONLINE
Price calculator
Type of assignment:
Urgency:
Writer level:
Cost per page:
Number of pages:
Total without discount:
Discount program

Science

← QuotationsObtaining Digital Evidence →

Buy custom Science essay

“Science is built of facts the way a house is built of bricks: but an accumulation of facts is no more science than a pile of bricks is a house” (Henri Pioncare)

Basing on this quote, even if the bricks are quite essential and basic in the construction of a house, the house is not only formed by the bricks. In other words, the house is made up of bricks and some other materials. By putting the bricks on top of each other, this will not enable the house to be built up because there will be need for other building materials that will have to hold the bricks together. More so, in order to come up with a house that is complete, there is need to have other things like irons sheets, doors, windows, and furniture among others. A strong foundation is needed in order for the house to be set up so as it can remain stable (“Science and knowledge”).

In the absence of a proper foundation and lack of some other means that will enable the putting together of bricks, there is a high possibility that the house will not stand but it will have to collapse instead. In regard to the statement above made by Pioncare, science is very close in resemblance to the idea of the house. Having just the knowledge of facts as well as formulas, without having any clear links between these facts and formulas, this is of no use. This paper is going to argue that, it is not enough for science can not be built by accumulated facts alone just the same way a house can not be formed by bricks alone but there need to be clear links and a stable foundation.

Science needs clear links between facts

Pioncare comes up with this statement in which he relates the building the house and science. This is a metaphor. A metaphor like this is as well applicable to other areas of knowledge like arts. For instance, in music, a song is made up of notes, and a painting is as a result of brush strokes. However, in the absence something to connect the notes or the strokes, which serve as “cement” and “sand”, there can be no music and there can be painting.

At the initial consideration, there seem to be repulsion between art and science as being the areas of knowledge, in the manner that these areas are the opposite of one another in all aspects. As on one hand, science is made up of objective facts, on the other hand art consists of the subjective facts. More so, there is requiring in science of hard evidence while on the other hand art requires the mind’s imagination. However, despite all these extremely opposite qualities in the two areas, both art and science do not have a quite different format between each other (Boring, 340).

As it has been indicated, science is made up of hard evidences as well as facts. Yet, bringing together these facts as well as the hard evidence does not make up science, in the same manner that putting the bricks together on top of each other in a simple way does not form a house. Science can only start taking place in the case where, the dots have been connected, facts strung together and the pieces have been glued together.

To set up science, there must be understanding of the “how” as well as the “why” in the same manner as there is need for a design  or plan for a house before the house is set up. At this point, it is when reason enters in. In the presence of reasoning, this is a point where there can be putting together of the pieces of the scientific puzzles.

According to Alexander (2), theory is a way through which there can be understanding of the world. It is a framework that facilitates the organizing of the facts as well as carrying out of the interpretation of these facts and experiences. In regard to the statement made by Pioncare concerning the bricks and science, theory is the blueprint that is employed to bring together bricks experience as well as facts in to structure that is coherent  that can be understood.

However, theory is not just a base upon which understanding of the world can be built, it is as well the base on which there can be developing of skills as well as other tools that are required for application. It can therefore be concluded that theory is quite vital to the practitioners just the same way it is to the scientists.

Alexander (2) points out that the application of theory by the practitioner is the final validity test for the theory as well as the test for its value. He quotes Mao Tse-tung who observed that “If we have a correct theory, but merely prate about it, pigeonhole it and do not put it in practice, then that theory, however good, has no significance.” (Alexander, Pg2).

This gives out a suggestion of one dimension of the association between planning and social sciences, and from this association or interaction, planning has acquired several of its theories as well as methods. Theories that have been set up by people in various fields such as economics, sociology, and social psychology among other fields are all contributions that are very much valuable for the understanding of the subjects as well as the contexts of setting up plans. Through planning, this can serve to offer an arena that is practical for the confirmation or refutation of theory (Alexander, 3).

Despite the great store of knowledge from studying, observing and accumulating of the empirical data in the systems that are most indigenous, the knowledge system could not be termed as science.  Acquiring or creating scientific knowledge begins with empirical knowledge that is owned by every society (Addy).

Among the definitions of “empirical” is the ability to be verified or disapproved through carrying out experiment or observing and mostly in the natural sciences. Thus, changing empirical knowledge in to scientific knowledge calls for verification, giving an implication that scientific knowledge can be brought about from various knowledge systems. But the issue here is that, if that is the case, then why is the knowledge divided. It has to be concerned with the point of origin of the scientific knowledge, the region of the world that is known as The North, having a smaller number of people in the world. On a comparative basis, a minimal level of such creativity occurs in the developing world that carries a larger population of people in the world. Thus, people do engage in moving from the Majority World to The North.  

Conclusion

Having just the knowledge of facts as well as formulas in science, without having any clear links between these facts and formulas turns out to be of no use. As it has been looked at, science is made up of hard evidences as well as facts. Yet, bringing together these facts as well as the hard evidence does not make up science, in the same manner that putting the bricks together on top of each other in a simple way does not form a house. Science can only start taking place in the case where, the dots have been connected, facts strung together and the pieces have been glued together.

Buy custom Science essay

Related essays

  1. Obtaining Digital Evidence
  2. Problem Solving
  3. Quotations
  4. The Existence of God