The Attitude and Practice of Science - Essay Sample

Introduction

Attitude refer to the settled way of feeling and thinking about something. As such, attitude is more likely to be impacted on by the believes and perception that people hold concerning different aspects. There are different factors that might affect people's attitude concerning a how things should be. This affects how people will interpret different phenomenon and the explanation concerning certain occurrence. Practice of science is one aspect that affect the way people feel and think about certain occurrence in the natural world. The other thing is the essence of religion and believes which similar to the science practices can impact on the attitude that people will have concerning specific occurrence. However, the only difference is that as opposed to religion believes which depend on explanation of phenomenon trough experience and testimonies, practice of science depend on verifiable experiments and observations. In the film "Revolutionary: Michael Behe and the Mystery of Molecular Machines", it show certain occurrence that science has not been able to provide explanation concerning them. On the other hand, the reading from Hume "Of the Miracle tries to explain that if in any chance there is evident of a certain occurrence that go against the rule of nature, it can only be identified as a miracle. In my reflection, concerning the two sources, am going to argue that the attitude and practice of science tend to reject possibility of supernatural power that can be used to explain occurrence of certain phenomenon.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Despite the fact that there is evidence that show certain occurrence that go against the scientific rules, scientist still believe that such occurrence can be explained trough scientific means. The attitude of science is that each and every occurrence can be explained by use of the science rules. This makes the scientist to reject any explanation concerning the existence of universe and the creatures found in it. For example, science reject the essence of creation as the source of the universe. Instead, it provide other methods of that led to existent of the universe and all the creatures including human being. Focusing on the existent of the living things in the universe, the most widely accepted scientific theory is that of Darwin. According to this theory, the existent of living things can be accounted to the aspect of self-selection and mutation. However, though this theory has successfully been able to explain how mutation and self-selection led to existent of many living things, there is still some areas that it has not been able to sufficiently provide an explanation but still claim that they can be explained scientifically.

According to Behe, molecular machine is one of the aspect that challenges scientific theory of self-selection and mutation as the source of all the living things. Darwin theory suggest that, different species evolved through mutation and self-selection into the species that we have today. However, this theory has not sufficiently explained the existent of what Behe call molecular machine. He takes flagellum as an example of a one of organism that its existent cannot be explained by use of the famous Darwin theory of evolution. This organism resemble a motor found in machines with different component that work together to make a propeller that enable it to effectively swim in water. The component used to make the propeller are irreducible meaning similar to machines meaning that removing any of these components will make it defective. This argument is supported by the mechanism of machines which if one of its component is removed it will no longer be operational (Discovery Science, 2017). The implication is hence that, the rule of self-selection and or mutation will not hold because they suggest development of certain features in the organism which will not be possible in bacteria such as flagellum which altering one of its component could mean making them ineffective.

Despite the fact that there has been proof that mutation and self-selection cannot be used to explain the existent of such molecular machines, scientist still hold that there is a possibility of mutation in these organism. The supporters of Darwin come up with some arguments that are less convincing concerning how self-selection and mutation might have occurred in flagellum. For example, they argue that the features of the propeller might have developed from a weaker mechanism to a stronger one that flagellum has today (Discovery Science, 2017). However, this assumption has been rejected since the features in flagellum are unique and not found in any other creature meaning they were not there for self-selection to use them.

Scientist also reject the aspect of intelligence design as the explanation of the occurrence of molecular machines. The fact that the mechanism of organism such as flagellum cannot be altered and yet be functional suggest that they were created the way they are and nothing has been changed by means such as self-selection and mutation as suggested by Darwin scientific theory. The only alternative will be intelligence design which will suggest that they were created by a superior entity which could be God. However, the scientist reject such possibilities citing that intelligent design is not scientific and hence it cannot be used to explain the existence of molecular machines such as flagellum. There has been a heated debate between the supporters of Darwin's theory and those who support intelligence design (Discovery Science, 2017). This is despite the fact that the new Darwinism have not been in a position to provide a convincing proof that self-selection and mutation can be applied in flagellum.

On the other hand, Hume in his writing about Of Miracle tend to reject possibility of a super being that determine how things happen. In his argument, he tries to support the rule of nature as the aspect that show normality of things. The implication is that, the phenomenon that follow the rule of nature are the only verifiable aspects that can be proved with no doubt. For example, it is true that the water will always freeze under certain condition (Hume, 1909). This occurrence will always be the same and it can be tested and proved trough experimentation and observation.

The explanation that Hume give concerning how miracles are verified also show that he does not believe in such occurrence. He argues that, unlike in the case of the occurrence that follow rule of nature, miracles can only be found trough testimonies of eye witness. He uses an example of the bible which narrates of miracles as described by the eye witness but not revealed to individual trough spirit. The implication is that, the witness from eye witness cannot be relied on completely because some of them might be as a result of imaginations or illusions (Hume, 1909).

In his explanation about how evident from eye witness should be verified, it is easy to tell that he does not support a possibility of super human who causes extraordinary occurrences. For example, he argues that if there were many eye witness who claim to have experienced a certain phenomenon, similarity in their explanation will determine the extent of truth in such evident. Besides, he also argues that whoever there are two version of evident concerning occurrence of an aspect that is not in line with rule of nature, one should always pick the version that carries less weight or the one that is closer to the rule of nature (Hume, 1909).

Though Hume acknowledge possibility of miracle which can be proved trough testimony, he seem to undermine the ability of testimony to proof a miracle. He says that " no testimony can be strong enough to make a miracle". He uses the concept of rejecting the superiority which suggest that we should always believe in the possibility that weigh less weight. He gave an example where if someone tells him that he has witnessed a man rise from dead, the two option will be that either he is telling the truth or he might be deceived (Hume, 1909). In this case, the superior option will be that this man has been deceived and hence the miracle he is talking about is not real.

The attitude and practice of science tend to reject possibility of supernatural power that can be used to explain occurrence of certain phenomenon. It tries to provide explanation to each and every aspect. In the film, there has been evident of certain phenomenon which science have not been able to explain their occurrence. An example in the existent of molecular machines which show that Darwin scientific theory cannot be applied to them. Nevertheless, the scientists such as the supporters of Darwin still does not believe in such possibilities. They provide weak augments that tries to show that there is possibility of mutation and self-selection in these molecular machines. They also reject the aspect of intelligent design as the source of such occurrence. On the other hand, the reading from Hume also seem to reject the possibility of super being that could lead to extraordinary occurrence. The argument is that the occurrence that does not follow natural laws are not real but they are just illusions.

References

Discovery Science. (2017, September 11). Revolutionary: Michael Behe and the Mystery of Molecular Machines [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/?watchv=7ToSEAj2V0

Hume, D. (1909). Chapter 1. In An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding: Of Miracles Part I (p. 1711-76).