Scientific knowledge and common sense

Cristina G. Machado de Oliveira

Scientific knowledge is a relatively recent achievement of mankind. The scientif
ic revolution of the seventeenth century marks the autonomy of science, from the
time that it seeks to shut down its own method of philosophical reflection. The
classic example of scientific procedure in the experimental sciences shows the
following: initially there is a problem that defies human intelligence, the scie
ntist elaborates a hypothesis and sets out the conditions for its control in ord
er to confirm it or not, but can not always conclusion is immediate and necessar
y to repeat the experiments several times or change the assumptions. The conclus
ion is so widespread, that is considered valid not only for this situation, but
for other similar items. Thus science, according to common sense thinking, seeks
to understand reality in a rational way, discovering universal and necessary re
lations between the phenomena, which can predict events and thus also act on nat
ure. For both, science uses rigorous methods and achieves a kind of systematic k
nowledge, accurate and objective. The dawn of civilization the Greeks were the f
irst to develop a kind of rational knowledge more off the myth, however, was tho
ught secular, not religious, they soon became close and conceptual birthing phil
osophy in the sixth century BC In the Greek colonies of Ionia and Magna Graecia,
were the first philosophers, and his main concern was the cosmology or the stud
y of nature. They sought the beginning of explanation of all things (arche), who
se unit summarize the extreme multiplicity of nature. The answers were varied, b
ut the theory that stayed for more time was Empedocles, for whom the physical wo
rld is composed of four elements: earth, water, air and fire. Many of these phil
osophers such as Thales and Pythagoras in the sixth century BC and Euclid in the
third century BC, occupied themselves with
astronomy and geometry, but, unlike the Egyptians and Babylonians, shut down the
religious concerns and practices, turning to more theoretical issues. Some fund
amental principles of mechanics were established by Archimedes in the third cent
ury BC, as seen by Galileo as the only Greek scientist in the modern sense of th
e word because the use of measures and statement of income in the form of genera
l law. Among the philosophers of antiquity, Archimedes is an exception, since th
e Greek science was more focused on rational speculation and disconnected from t
he technical and practical concerns. The pinnacle of Greek thought took the fift
h and fourth centuries BC, a period in which they lived Socrates, Plato and Aris
totle. Plato vigorously opposed the senses and reason, and believes that early l
ead opinion (doxa), imprecise, subjective and changeable to meet. So you must lo
ok to science (episteme), which consists of the rational knowledge of essences,
ideas immutable, objective and universal. Sciences like mathematics, geometry, a
stronomy, are necessary steps to be followed by the thinker to reach the heights
of philosophical reflection. Aristotle attenuates the Platonic idealism, and hi
s look is undoubtedly more realistic, not devaluing both directions. Son inherit
ed a taste for medical observation and gave great contribution to biology, but,
like all Greek, Aristotle seeks only to know, with their reflections off of the
art and utilitarian concerns. Moreover, there is still a static conception of th
e world, by which the Greeks tend to link the home to perfection, the lack of mo
vement. Although Aristarchus of Samos had proposed a heliocentric model, the tra
dition that the Greeks received from Eudoxus, confirmed by Aristotle and later b
y Ptolemy, based on the geocentric model, the Earth finds itself still in the ce
nter of the universe and around it rotate the spheres where they are carved the
moon, the five planets and the Sun this sense, for Aristotle, the physics is the
part of philosophy that seeks to understand the essence of natural things forme
d by the four elements and are in constant rectilinear motion toward the center
of the earth or in the opposite direction to it. That's because heavy bodies suc
h as land and water tend to bottom, because this is their natural place. Already
the bodies light as air and fire to tend
up. The movement is then understood as the transition of the body that seeks a s
tate of rest in its natural place. The Aristotelian physics part, so the definit
ions of essences and analysis of the intrinsic qualities of bodies. From this br
ief sketch,€Greek science can give the following characteristics: 1) You are co
nnected to philosophy, which guides the method type of approach to problems, 2)
is qualitative, because the argument is based on analysis of intrinsic propertie
s of bodies, 3) is not experimental, and finds himself off the technique, 4) is
contemplative, because it seeks knowledge for knowledge, rather than the practic
al application of knowledge, 5) is based on a static conception of the world. Th
e Middle Ages, the period of the fifth century until the fifteenth century, rece
ives the Greek-Roman heritage, maintaining the same conception of science. Despi
te obvious differences, it is possible to understand this continuity, due to the
fact that the system of serfdom also be characterized by disregard for techniqu
e and any manual activity. Apart from a few exceptions - like the trials of Roge
r Bacon and the fruitful contribution of the Arabs - the science inherited from
the Greek tradition is linked to religious interests and is subordinate to the c
riteria of revelation, since the Middle Ages, human reason should be submitted t
o the witness of faith. From the fourteenth century, Scholasticism - main mediev
al philosophical and theological school - decays. This period was very harmful t
o the development of science because new ideas fermenting in cities, but the gua
rdians of the old order resisted changes in a dogmatic way. Sterilized by the pr
inciple of authority, clung to the truths of old books, they were the Bible, Ari
stotle or Ptolemy. Such resistance is not restricted only to the intellectual fi
eld, but often resulted in processes and pursuits. The Holy Office or Inquisitio
n, to control the entire production, made the
censorship of ideas that could be disclosed or not. Giordano Bruno was burned al
ive in the sixteenth century because his theory of the infinite cosmos was regar
ded as pantheistic, since infinity was the exclusive attribute of God. The scien
tific method, as we know it today, comes in the Modern Age in the seventeenth ce
ntury. The Scientific Renaissance was not a simple evolution of scientific thoug
ht, but that assumes real break new conception of knowledge. We must examine the
historical context in which such radical changes occurred in order to realize t
hat they do not turn off other events also striking: the emergence of new class
of bourgeois, capitalist economic development, commercial revolution, revival of
arts, letters and philosophy. All this indicates the emergence of a new man, co
nfident in reason and the power to transform the world. The new era was marked b
y rationalism, which was characterized by the primacy of reason as an instrument
of knowledge that the exemption criteria of authority and revelation. Call secu
larization secularization of thought or concern with off of the justifications m
ade by religion, by the belief that demand adherence to only accept the truths o
f reason from research through demonstration. Hence the intense concern with the
method, the starting point for the discussion of many thinkers of the seventeen
th century: Descartes, Spinoza, Francis Bacon, Galileo, among others. Another fe
ature of the new times is the knowledge asset, as opposed to knowing contemplati
ve. Not only knowledge aims at the transformation of reality, but is himself to
be acquired by experience, because of the alliance between science and art. A po
ssible explanation to justify the change is that the merchant class, consisting
of the burghers, was imposed by the appreciation of the work, as opposed to idle
ness of the aristocracy. Furthermore, inventions and discoveries become necessar
y for development of industry and commerce. The new scientific method proved to
be fruitful, not ceasing to expand its application. The results obtained by Gali
leo in physics and astronomy, and Kepler's laws and the findings of Tycho-Brahe,
allowed the Newton
elaboration of the theory of gravitation universal.Ao arise during this process
the academies where scientists come together to exchange experiences and publica
tions. Gradually the new method is adapted to other fields of research, giving r
ise to various sciences. In the eighteenth century Lavoisier's chemistry makes a
science of precise measurements, the nineteenth century was the development of
biological sciences and medicine, highlighting the work of Claude Bernard and wi
th the physiology of Darwin to the theory of evolution. The scientific method is
initially as follows: there is a problem that challenges the intellect, the sci
entist elaborates a hypothesis and sets out the conditions for its control in or
der to confirm it or not. The conclusion is then generalized, or€considered val
id not only for this situation, but for other similar items. Moreover, it is alm
ost never a solitary work of the scientist, because, nowadays, more and more res
earch is the object of attention of specialized groups linked to universities, c
ompanies or the state. Anyway, the objectivity of science results from the trial
made by members of the scientific community that critically evaluate the proced
ures used and findings, published in specialized journals and conferences. Thus,
within the common sense view (ie a wide range of concepts generally accepted as
true in a particular social environment. Again and unthinkingly in everyday lif
e, some of these notions hide misconceptions, partial or biased. It is a lack of
reasoning, treating if purchased without a knowledge base critical, accurate, c
onsistent and systematic), science seeks to understand reality in a rational way
, discovering universal and necessary relations between the phenomena, which can
predict events and thus also act on the nature . For both, science uses rigorou
s methods and achieves a kind of systematic knowledge, accurate and objective. H
owever, despite the rigor of the method, it is convenient to think that science
is knowledge certain and definite as it progresses in a continuous process of re
search assumes that changes as new facts arise or when new instruments are inven
ted. For example, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Newton's laws were
reformulated by several mathematicians who developed techniques to apply them m
ore accurately.
In the twentieth century, the theory of relativity, Einstein dismissed the class
ical conception that light travels in straight lines. This serves to show the te
ntativeness of scientific knowledge without, however, belittle the seriousness a
nd rigor of method and results. Ie, laws and theories are still in effect hypoth
eses with varying degrees of confirmation and authenticity, and can be improved
or overcome. From the explanation given above, can we say that there is a univer
sal method? Does the universal methods should be considered valid for different
situations? And with different situations we can classify them as universal? How
to describe universal relations through methods "individual"? Does this kind of
method is really universally valid? Can we name the method as being universal?
According to Alan Chalmers, in his book The Making of science, "the degree of ge
nerality and applicability of laws and theories are subject to constant improvem
ent." [1] From this statement we can conclude that the universal method in reali
ty is not generic as well, or better, is not as absolute as it is subjected to a
constant replacement. For Chalmers there is no universal method or set of unive
rsal standard, however, remain a-historical models implied in the occasional suc
cessful activities, but that does not mean that anything goes in the epistemolog
ical arena. The issue of constant replacement of the theories was very explicit
in the brief explanation of the history of science done previously, where we had
a clear change of theory, method or assumption by a more coherent within its hi
storical period and / or science. Given all this has been seen can at least just
ify that science aims to establish generalizations applicable to the world, beca
use since the time of the revolution we are in a position to know that these sci
entific generalizations can not be established a priori, we have to accept that
the requirement of certainty is mere utopia. However, the requirement that our k
nowledge is always being transformed, enhanced and expanded it's pure reality. [
1] Chalmers, Alan. The making of science. p.19 Bibliography:
CHALMERS, Alan. The making of science. Translation: Beatriz Sidon. São Paulo: F
undação Editora da UNESP, 1994. COTRIM, Gilberto. Fundamentals of Philosophy -
Be, Know and Do. São Paulo: Ed: Saraiva, 1997. LALANDE, André. Dictionary of
technical and critical philosophy. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1996.