SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY

The Paradoxes of, and the Logical Limitations, of Scientific Inquiry

The Paradoxes of, and the Logical Limitations, of Scientific Inquiry

Introduction

Isn't it strange that scientists perform the long, enduring inquiries, just so that other scientists can change them in a later time? Scientific inquiries have a paradox. The paradox pertains to the sufferings of scientists, which they endure with passion and love. Science is to provide satisfactory explanations for all that we seem to require an explanation. Science cannot go beyond phenomena and is the generalization of the same under a uniform law. Science deals only with phenomena and discovers the facts and the laws that govern them. It also investigates the uniform, current operation, which existed before the emergence of inquiry. The scientific inquiry has limitations to what can be seen, heard, felt, smelled or tasted (Bell & Linn, 2000). Scientific inquiry involves an interrelated set of demonstrated truths in the absence by observable factors.

With the development of capitalism, modern science took a big boost, showing in partial benefits for humanity. It's no secret that, paradoxically, capitalist progress impedes progress in science and discoveries that emerge that can be harmful, such as the use of nuclear energy for destructive purposes. The consequences have associations with deadly values to scientists. Therefore, it proves to be an irrationality of capitalism. The limitations of scientific inquiry can be summarized as follows: Science is done by humans, so it is subject to error. In the same way, using the scientific method or interpreting the results may be misleading. Scientific inquiry, as a process, is dynamic. Its validity may be questionable, because, what is true today might be something else yesterday. The results can be manipulated to achieve some end, and they are not always accessible to all.

Scientific Inquiry

An investigator performs a scientific inquiry as a man not only of thought, but of action. The investigator handles the natural phenomenon in a controlled manner, with the sole purpose of generating information for the purpose of amplifying the magnitude with, which it is generated (Koslowski, 1996). The most rigorous inquiry applied to the pursuit of knowledge is the scientific inquiry, which has a certain number of limitations.

Limitations

The scientific method has limitations to what can be seen, heard, felt, smelled or tasted. It incorporates an interrelated set of demonstrated truths in the absence of observable factors. Therefore, it is only through the use of these senses that this observation occurs. As a result, for a theory to qualify as a scientific theory, it must have support of events, processes, or properties which are observable (Lederman & Bell, 1998). In any definition of science, it is inherent that the statements cannot be checked by observation, or are not saying something or at least not science.

The scientific inquiry has other limitations, as well. A scientific inquiry is amoral, because science itself simply does not have the mechanism to issue rules on this regulation. There is nothing inherent in the scientific inquiry that provides for the definition and study ...