how do you k now what you k now? or at least what you think you know? how do you k now what you k...

HOW DO YOU

KNOW WHAT

YOU KNOW?Or at least what you think you know?

HOW DO YOU

KNOW WHAT

YOU KNOW?Or at least what you think you know?

????

???? ??

??

1. Personal Experience through the five senses. I know a bee sting hurts; I know how to ride a bike.


2. Reliance on Authority. I know how far away the sun is because the book says so; Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so.

2. Reliance on Authority. I know how far away the sun is because the book says so; Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so.3. Logic.

I know 2 million + 2 million = 4 million, even though I’ve never counted that high. I know I have a brain, even though I’ve never seen it.

3. Logic. I know 2 million + 2 million = 4 million, even though I’ve never counted that high. I know I have a brain, even though I’ve never seen it.

4. Feeling or Intuition. I know she’s the one for me; I know my purpose in life is to be a fireman.


5. Wishful Thinking (you really want it to be true) I just know I’m going to win the lottery!


6. Bluffing (lying) - you try to persuade others for an ulterior motive. You should buy these tickets from me because I know this team is going to the Super Bowl this year; I know this bone is from an ape-man.


WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO “KNOW” SOMETHING?WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO “KNOW” SOMETHING?WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO “KNOW” SOMETHING?WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO “KNOW” SOMETHING?

WHAT CAN YOU BE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN OF?

WHAT CAN YOU BE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN OF?

If someone tells you “There is no such thing as absolute truth,” ask them:

Are you absolutely sure?

If someone tells you “There is no such thing as absolute truth,” ask them:

Are you absolutely sure?

The concept that each observer creates his own reality is not scientific, but religious!

The question of whether there is or is not absolute truth is philosophical rather than

scientific.

The concept that each observer creates his own reality is not scientific, but religious!

The question of whether there is or is not absolute truth is philosophical rather than

scientific.



2. Reliance on Authority. I know how far away the sun is because the book says so; Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so.

2. Reliance on Authority. I know how far away the sun is because the book says so; Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so.3. Logic.

I know 2 million + 2 million = 4 million, even though I’ve never counted that high. I know I have a brain, even though I’ve never seen it.

3. Logic. I know 2 million + 2 million = 4 million, even though I’ve never counted that high. I know I have a brain, even though I’ve never seen it.







WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO “KNOW” SOMETHING?WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO “KNOW” SOMETHING?WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO “KNOW” SOMETHING?WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO “KNOW” SOMETHING?

REASONS TO BELIEVE OTHERS WHO TRY TO PERSUADE US OF WHAT THEY “KNOW”

REASONS TO BELIEVE OTHERS WHO TRY TO PERSUADE US OF WHAT THEY “KNOW”

IS IT BECAUSE:IS IT BECAUSE:

(1) They claim to have personal experience, OR(2) They appeal to an authority we trust, OR(3) We have checked out their logic and found it trustworthy?

(1) They claim to have personal experience, OR(2) They appeal to an authority we trust, OR(3) We have checked out their logic and found it trustworthy?

OR are we willing to trust their (4) intuition, (5) wishful thinking, or (6) bluffing?

OR are we willing to trust their (4) intuition, (5) wishful thinking, or (6) bluffing?

DOES MEMORIZATION HAVE A PLACE IN SCIENCE (and science classes)?

DOES MEMORIZATION HAVE A PLACE IN SCIENCE (and science classes)?

Yes! It is part of the knowledge we have by authority. It would be a great waste of time if

you had to continually look up how much two plus two adds up to, or if you

continually had to rediscover Newton’s Laws ( f = m a, etc.)

Yes! It is part of the knowledge we have by authority. It would be a great waste of time if

you had to continually look up how much two plus two adds up to, or if you

continually had to rediscover Newton’s Laws ( f = m a, etc.)

But if all we did was memorize, we would never gain new knowledge

that did not exist before.

But if all we did was memorize, we would never gain new knowledge

that did not exist before.

1. INDUCTIVE.1. INDUCTIVE.

2. DEDUCTIVE.2. DEDUCTIVE.

THE TWO TYPES OF LOGICTHE TWO TYPES OF LOGIC

Look at many phenomena and try to discover a pattern that points to a general principle. Inductive logic tries to determine the most reasonable (most likely) conclusion.This is the heart of the scientific method.

Start with general principles accepted as true and apply them to specific cases.

Deductive logic tries to establish absolute truth, i.e., the conclusion MUST be true.

This is the basis of mathematics, NOT science.

CONTRASTING LOGICCONTRASTING LOGIC

The conclusions of inductive logic result from examination of observable phenomena

(a posteriori). They are testable.

The premises of deductive logic may come from inductive conclusions, or they may

just be statements accepted as self-evident (a priori). They are

not necessarily the result of testing.

EVEN WITH CORRECT LOGIC, FALSE PREMISES CAN LEAD TO FALSE CONCLUSIONS.

EVEN WITH CORRECT LOGIC, FALSE PREMISES CAN LEAD TO FALSE CONCLUSIONS.

All dogs bark. (Or, “If an animal is a dog, then it barks.”)

Snoopy is a dog.Therefore, Snoopy barks.

Not if

Snoopy is a

Basenji!

Not if

Snoopy is a

Basenji!

Basenjis do not bark.

Basenjis do not bark.

If any one of our premises is wrong, then our conclusion is unreliable.

If any one of our premises is wrong, then our conclusion is unreliable.

2007 by David A. Prentice

Euclid’s Parallel Line Postulate says that for any line, there can be only one parallel line through a point not on the first line.

First line

Point not on the first line Only one parallel line

BUT IS IT REALLY SELF-EVIDENT? Lobachevskyan and Riemannian geometry say that space is curved,

so there is no such thing as an infinitely long straight line in the sense that we understand “straight.”

BUT IS IT REALLY SELF-EVIDENT? Lobachevskyan and Riemannian geometry say that space is curved,

so there is no such thing as an infinitely long straight line in the sense that we understand “straight.”

One says space is negatively curved so that there are an

infinite number of parallel lines through a point not on a line.

The other says space is positively curved so that there are no parallel lines. All lines

intersect at infinity.

EACH OF THE THREE IS THE BASIS OF A DIFFERENT VERSION OF GEOMETRY, BUT NONE CAN BE PROVEN. EACH OF THE THREE IS THE BASIS OF A DIFFERENT

VERSION OF GEOMETRY, BUT NONE CAN BE PROVEN.

POSTULATES - Statements that are taken as self-evident and accepted without proof.

POSTULATES - Statements that are taken as self-evident and accepted without proof.

Based on the deductive logic of the ancient Greeks, who believed that logic always leads to truth.

Testing was unimportant to them.

Most famous Greek philosopher: Aristotle (inventor of the logic still used today),

whose ideas were taught as fact for about 2,000 years throughout Europe,

west Asia, and Africa.

Based on the deductive logic of the ancient Greeks, who believed that logic always leads to truth.

Testing was unimportant to them.

Most famous Greek philosopher: Aristotle (inventor of the logic still used today),

whose ideas were taught as fact for about 2,000 years throughout Europe,

west Asia, and Africa.

SCIENCE” UNTIL THE MIDDLE AGES:SCIENCE” UNTIL THE MIDDLE AGES:

EXAMPLES OF INCORRECT CONCLUSIONS BASED ON FAULTY DEDUCTIVE LOGIC

EXAMPLES OF INCORRECT CONCLUSIONS BASED ON FAULTY DEDUCTIVE LOGIC

“Scientific” ideas of Aristotle TAUGHT AS FACT in European Universities for 2000 YEARS:

“Scientific” ideas of Aristotle TAUGHT AS FACT in European Universities for 2000 YEARS:

1. The earth is the center of the solar system.Falsified by Copernicus.

1. The earth is the center of the solar system.Falsified by Copernicus.

2. Heavier objects fall faster.Falsified by Galileo.

2. Heavier objects fall faster.Falsified by Galileo.

3. All objects possess an innate tendency to come to rest.Falsified by Newton.

3. All objects possess an innate tendency to come to rest.Falsified by Newton.

4. There is no such thing as an atom.Falsified by many modern scientists.

4. There is no such thing as an atom.Falsified by many modern scientists.

ARISTOTLE’S MOST BASIC MISTAKE IN LOGIC:

ARISTOTLE’S MOST BASIC MISTAKE IN LOGIC:

1. He reasoned that if the stars were different distances, they should display parallax.

2. He could not detect any parallax. 3. Therefore he decided “If I cannot see

parallax then it does not exist.”

Assuming there was no parallax led him to be wrong about EVERYTHING ELSE!

1. He reasoned that if the stars were different distances, they should display parallax.

2. He could not detect any parallax. 3. Therefore he decided “If I cannot see

parallax then it does not exist.”

Assuming there was no parallax led him to be wrong about EVERYTHING ELSE!


ARE YOU WILLING TO “UN-LEARN” SOME OF THE ARE YOU WILLING TO “UN-LEARN” SOME OF THE THINGS YOU HAVE LEARNED?THINGS YOU HAVE LEARNED?

ARE YOU WILLING TO “UN-LEARN” SOME OF THE ARE YOU WILLING TO “UN-LEARN” SOME OF THE THINGS YOU HAVE LEARNED?THINGS YOU HAVE LEARNED?

Aristotle was wrong because he started with the assumption Aristotle was wrong because he started with the assumption that if he could not see something then it did not exist. This that if he could not see something then it did not exist. This

has happened in later years too. has happened in later years too.

Aristotle was wrong because he started with the assumption Aristotle was wrong because he started with the assumption that if he could not see something then it did not exist. This that if he could not see something then it did not exist. This

has happened in later years too. has happened in later years too.

1.1. Wiedersheim and “vestigial organs” (function of appendix Wiedersheim and “vestigial organs” (function of appendix identified in peer-reviewed 2007 article from Duke identified in peer-reviewed 2007 article from Duke University Medical School)University Medical School)

1.1. Wiedersheim and “vestigial organs” (function of appendix Wiedersheim and “vestigial organs” (function of appendix identified in peer-reviewed 2007 article from Duke identified in peer-reviewed 2007 article from Duke University Medical School)University Medical School)

THERE MAY BE MANY OTHER THINGS WE DON’T KNOW YET.THERE MAY BE MANY OTHER THINGS WE DON’T KNOW YET.THERE MAY BE MANY OTHER THINGS WE DON’T KNOW YET.THERE MAY BE MANY OTHER THINGS WE DON’T KNOW YET.

2. Schr2. Schrödinger with his “quantum cat” related to radioactive dinger with his “quantum cat” related to radioactive decay (radioactive decay rates found to vary predictably decay (radioactive decay rates found to vary predictably every month -- Stanford Univ. 2010)every month -- Stanford Univ. 2010)

2. Schr2. Schrödinger with his “quantum cat” related to radioactive dinger with his “quantum cat” related to radioactive decay (radioactive decay rates found to vary predictably decay (radioactive decay rates found to vary predictably every month -- Stanford Univ. 2010)every month -- Stanford Univ. 2010)

3. Many segments of DNA formerly called “pseudogenes” 3. Many segments of DNA formerly called “pseudogenes” now have a known function. They are not “junk DNA” after now have a known function. They are not “junk DNA” after all.all.

3. Many segments of DNA formerly called “pseudogenes” 3. Many segments of DNA formerly called “pseudogenes” now have a known function. They are not “junk DNA” after now have a known function. They are not “junk DNA” after all.all.


ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTICS OF A SCIENTIST:CHARACTERISTICS OF A SCIENTIST:

ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTICS OF A SCIENTIST:CHARACTERISTICS OF A SCIENTIST:

SKEPTICISM!SKEPTICISM!SKEPTICISM!SKEPTICISM!

While most scientific progress occurs as While most scientific progress occurs as we build on the work of others, the we build on the work of others, the great great leaps forward leaps forward usually happen because usually happen because

someone doubted what almost everybody someone doubted what almost everybody else thought.else thought.

While most scientific progress occurs as While most scientific progress occurs as we build on the work of others, the we build on the work of others, the great great leaps forward leaps forward usually happen because usually happen because

someone doubted what almost everybody someone doubted what almost everybody else thought.else thought.

There is NOTHING in science that is above There is NOTHING in science that is above question. question. (Even gravity!)(Even gravity!)

There is NOTHING in science that is above There is NOTHING in science that is above question. question. (Even gravity!)(Even gravity!)

Present + Repeatable + Observable = SCIENCE

Past + Non-Repeatable +

Eyewitness Account = HISTORY

Past + Non-Repeatable + No Eyewitnesses

= BELIEF

THE SCIENTIFIC METHODTHE SCIENTIFIC METHODTHE SCIENTIFIC METHODTHE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

1. Define the problem. What do you want to know?

(E.g. “Does music affect how plants grow?”)

2. Gather information about the subject.

(AUTHORITY)

3. Formulate a hypothesis.

4. Devise an experiment to test the hypothesis.

5. Observe the results of the test. (EXPERIENCE)

6. Draw a conclusion (INDUCTIVE LOGIC) and report

your results so others can repeat the test.

How to Set up an ExperimentHow to Set up an ExperimentHow to Set up an ExperimentHow to Set up an Experiment

1. Experiments are used to try to determine cause-

and-effect.

2. Use your hypothesis to decide what factor you

want to test. You deliberately change ONLY that

one factor, the independent variable, to see if

there is a change in a different factor, the

dependent variable.

For example, if you want to know the effect

of video games on heart rate, you would have

your volunteers play video games (independent)

to see if their heart rate (dependent) changes.


3. You should use as many experimental subjects

(people, animals, etc.) as possible to make sure

the results are not just because of one person’s

unusual reaction.

4. To make sure you are not overlooking something,

you should also have a control group for which

you deliberately do NOT change the independent

variable, while watching to see if the dependent

variable changes anyway.


5. Try to keep every other factor constant, except the

one you are testing. For instance, make sure

everybody got the same amount of sleep, ate and

drank the same thing, etc.

6. If possible, you should repeat your experiment

several times – especially if you had only a small

number of experimental subjects.

7. You should then draw conclusions about whether

your hypothesis was confirmed or falsified. Be as

logical as possible.

8. Then write a report.

How Scientific Knowledge IncreasesHow Scientific Knowledge IncreasesHow Scientific Knowledge IncreasesHow Scientific Knowledge Increases

1. Start with a problem or question.

2. Formulate a hypothesis.

3. Test the hypothesis by experimentation, following

the scientific method.

4. If your hypothesis is falsified, you learned

something!

5. If your hypothesis seems to be confirmed, report

your results (in a peer-reviewed journal) so

others can repeat the test and check your work.

The Importance of Peer ReviewThe Importance of Peer ReviewThe Importance of Peer ReviewThe Importance of Peer Review

1. An honest scientist would NEVER say something

was proven. There could always be something you

overlooked! Instead, you state whether your

hypothesis was confirmed or falsified.

2. If the hypothesis was confirmed, a scientist pub-

lishes a report in a peer-reviewed technical journal

– that is, chemists review the work of other chem-

ists, astronomers review the work of other astro-

nomers, etc. They are looking to see if the experi-

menter made a mistake or overlooked something. Many popular magazines are NOT peer-reviewed!

The Importance of Peer ReviewThe Importance of Peer ReviewThe Importance of Peer ReviewThe Importance of Peer Review

3. If your work passes peer review at the technical

journal, it is published. Other professional

scientists may then use your work as a reference

to guide them in their own experiments. (You

become the authority!)

how do you k now what you k now? or at least what you think you know? how do you k now what you k...

Documents

absolute truth

personal experience

bee sting

super bowl

wishful thinking

ulterior motive