STSE by AJCReboa Unit 1

Science, Technology, Society, and the Environment (STSE) Alejandro Jose Carreon Reboa
SCIENCE,
TECHNOLOGY, SOCIETY,
AND THE ENVIRONMENT
(STSE)
Author:
Alejandro Jose Carreon Reboa

Department of Biology, College of Science
Polytechnic University of the Philippines
NOTE: This instructional module can be used only by intended students as it is for academic
purposes only. This module cannot be altered, rewritten, adapted, duplicated, reproduce, or used
in any way for any commercial purposes and activities. This module is an intellectual property of
the author and protected by copyrights laws.
Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 1 of 84

UNIT 1
THE PHILOSOPHICAL,
HISTORICAL, AND
SOCIAL BASES OF SCIENCE
Page
Part 1 – Understanding Science and its Limitation …………………… 03
Part 2 – Science as a System of Knowledge ……………………………. 14
Part 3 – Human Behavior and the Development of Society …………... 33
Part 4 – Human Society as the Development of Science ………………. 52
Image Sources ……………………………………………………………. 69
References & Further Readings ………………………………………... 76

PART 1 – Understanding Science and its Limitation
Introduction
Science, Technology, Society and Environment or STES is an interdisciplinary approach of

science education aiming to teach the students and the public about understanding progress of
human knowledge particularly of science and technology, and to analyze its role in shaping human
society through social, economic and environmental aspects. Initially came from advocacy and
academic movements of different stakeholders and sectors of science education, STES have
evolved to become a full course in universities and educational institutions, aiming to boost
curiosity, to promote critical analysis, and to inspire social participation to students and even the
masses (Mansour, 2009; Aikenhead, 2003; Pedretti, 2005).
From these disciplines, numerous concepts, theories and ideologies have risen: great discoveries
and novel inventions were produced and enjoyed by the society leading to ease of burden of work,
higher quality of life, and economic development (Rescher, 1999). Nonetheless, numerous studies
and evidences about the drawbacks and consequences produced by the advancement of scientific
knowledge, noting that humans have reaped the benefits of science yet with great implications and
repercussions against the society, environment. Thereby, these have stirred public interest in
science, pondering with different socioeconomic, sociopolitical and moral issues that the society
bears as today’s realities and problems (Feyerabend, 1978), such as climate change, energy crises,
decline of biodiversity, genetic engineering, social inequality, overpopulation, so on and so forth.
It is a general objective of STSE to promote scientific knowledge and literacy to the public. Thus,
for us to understand the relevance and implication of science and technology to ourselves, and the
environment, STES requires some background on basic sciences, social sciences, to history,
humanities and philosophy (Mansor, 2009; Savaget and Acero, 2017; Lovbrand et al., 2010).
Likewise, as part of the academic curriculum STSE hopes that the people receiving its education
must be able to (Aikenhead, 2003; Pedretti, 2005):
 Widen their views and perspectives about science and technology and its impact to the
society and vice versa;
 Nurture ideas and values necessary to analyze issues and construct pertinent conclusions
which can be used for decision-making; and,
 Develop sense of responsibility and accountability to every action and decision made.
In this lesson we are going to characterize and discuss science together with its relation to other
discipline of knowledge. We are to explore and analyze the subtleties of science, to comprehend
the role of philosophy and human behavior in the deeper understanding of modern sciences,
nevertheless also to discuss some of its limitation as a discipline and its implication which we can
use to explain science part in directing the development of the human civilization.
Knowledge and Modern Science
Knowledge have a more general reference than science such that knowledge encompasses
anything from objects, events, occurrences, work, endeavor, information, to concrete and abstract
ideas, that consciously we can be aware of, acquainted to, or understood about (Boghossian, 2006).
Knowledge is generally attained through involvement of mental and cognitive processing, with
experience, perception, and learning (Larsen et al. 2013); so, in the succeeding chapters, we will
devote sometime discussing subtleties of human knowledge. On the other hand, modern science
as defined today in the 21st century, is a well-defined accumulation and organization of human

knowledge achieved through a systematic and methodological process called as scientific method
(Andersen and Hepburn, 2016; Heilbron, 2003). In this current view of science, knowledge
produced with this method is distinctly classified as scientific to separate it from other forms of
knowledge which hasn’t generally undergoes the process of scientific method as non-scientific.
Thus, modern scientists and proponents of modern science can test a concept or idea of knowledge
being scientific or not depends on the how the information or data is gathered and undergoes the
process of scientific method, (Hansson, 2017; Andersen and Hepburn, 2016).
Scientific method identifies scientific knowledge through valid and reliable tests that will
determine ideas or concepts truthfully, logically and rationally describing the actual observations
and occurrences in the Universe. However, many philosophers, scientists and science historians
today still have no exact definition what constitute as scientific method. The scientific method we
are familiar about and commonly taught in many science courses at schools and universities, is
known as the positivist’s scientific method. Some of the key assumptions regarding the nature of
science and positivist approach states that the requisite a scientific knowledge must be (Godfrey-
Smith, 2009; Brody, 1993):
 Empirically observable, evidence gathering by utilizing the bodily senses;
 Testable or verifiable, meaning that an idea or concept must be able to be tested or
validated and repeated for further verification by other people (repeatability);
 Falsifiable meaning that an idea or concept can be challenged or contradicted with an
opposite or negative idea or concept with is also equally can be testable and repeatable;
 Repeating and continuous process where scientific knowledge is repeatedly tested,
verified and undergoes further improvement, otherwise totally superseded or discarded
(see Figure 1.1); and,
 Objectivity must always be observed using scientific method, which can be more
effectively implemented through cooperation with the scientific community and learned
society through effective and scholarly communication and scientific consensus (Popper,
2002), that scientific knowledge is regularly reviewed, assessed and evaluated (Kornfeld
and Hewitt, 1981).
Logical positivism is a core philosophy engrained in scientific method stating that the science
should be solely based on knowledge that is observable, thus excluding anything that is
unobservable as non-scientific and not part of the mainstream science. These philosophical
assumptions led regarding scientific knowledge (Popper 2002; Godfrey-Smith, 2009) undergoes
the strict step-by-step regimen of scientific method steps as follow:
a) Observation – Scientific observation refers to empirical observation, meaning utilization
of the bodily senses to acquire initial data and information, usually from the environment
by experience or learning. Intuitions and extrasensory perception of knowledge are usually
not considered scientific source of knowledge, except in being studied in psychology
(Klein, 2003; Gianini et al., 1984; Sheehy et al., 2002).
b) Determining the problem – This step refers to the deeper inquiry of knowledge gathered
from observation where questions are framed to guide and direct the flow of the scientific
process. Also, these questions are usually more specific rather than generalized, soliciting
answers that must be more well defined, qualified and quantified (Booth et al., 2008).
c) Formulating hypothesis – Plural form is hypotheses; refers to the construction and
presenting rational and logical concept or idea that tentatively can answer the problem that
is being studied. In scientific research, a good hypothesis is a tentative answer to the
research question which directs the research process to certainty, simplicity, and testability
of the concepts involved (Schick and Vaughn, 2002).
d) Testing hypothesis - Gathering evidences and information in this step is carefully
performed either by experimentation or observation that can prove or rebut the hypothesis
or arrive to other results (Wilson, 1998). It is crucial at this stage to delve at the possible
existing association particularly correlation and causality behind the subjects being studied
(Aldrich, 1995).
e) Analysis – Offers answer to the problems and arriving to conclusion and generalization of
the knowledge involved in the scientific process. If the results yielded are inconclusive, the

process shall repeat again with further refinement of the testing grounds, reexamination of
the guiding questions and hypothesis for possible revision either partially or fully.
Otherwise, the whole concept will be totally discarded for new ones (Nola and Irzik, 2005).
Scientific
Knowledge Scientific
Knowledge
Observation
Determining
Analysis
the Problem
SCIENTIFIC
METHOD
Scientific Scientific
Knowledge Knowledge
Testing Formulating
Hypothesis Hypothesis
Scientific
Knowledge
Figure 1.1 – Modern science distinctly classified a knowledge as scientific if it undergoes the strict
process of scientific method. Scientific method is a continuous, repeating process where at any
step scientific knowledge can be acquired but most of the important scientific contributions are
achieved at the analysis or conclusion step: likewise, scientific knowledge evolves as it is always
reviewed and undergoes further refinement, making the scientific process as iterating and
continuous process.
Subtleties of Modern Science
Modern science is covering many fields and disciplines where many majorities of it are
interdisciplinary, having overlapping interest of studies and engagement (see Figure 1.2). Basic
sciences such as life sciences, physical sciences, social sciences are primarily engaged in studying
underlying fundamental principles that can explain different phenomena and observations in nature
and about human society. Basic sciences employ scientific method through basic research with
the purpose of constructing new scientific theories and concepts or revising and expand existing
ones. While applied sciences, thru applied utilizes understanding of scientific knowledge about
nature to adapt and modify observed phenomena to develop technologies and practical
applications: applied research uses science for purpose of solving practical and realistic world
problems (Arthur, 2009; Rull, 2014).

Figure 1.2 – Modern Science comprises of different scientific disciplines and fields and many of
it are have overlapping scope of studies and interest.
Technology must be differentiated from from applied sciences, such that the former refers the
collective enterprise of discoveries, inventions, and knowledge of processes and skills especially
relevant to utility and performance of work; while the latter refers technically to specific
technologies that is a product of scientific research (Wise, 1985). Technology thus is used in the
wider sense of the word, even ancient civilization yielded considerable technological feats without
the actual disciplines of modern sciences, and insomuch that the applied sciences have produced
technologies (Krebs and Krebs, 2003).
Also, life sciences and physical sciences, are classified under natural science since its scientific
knowledge is based on the actual observation of natural phenomena; while sometimes, in some
ways social sciences are classified as part of natural science since human beings are part of nature
and our behavior manifesting individually and collectively are considered natural as part of our
being (Cohen, 1994). Formal systems also called “formal science” are composed of mathematics,
logic information and computational sciences. Knowledge from formal systems are before the
fact or “priori”, independent from reality observed in nature, meaning most of its concepts are
abstract and its evidences are independent from actual observation and experience. Rather its own
proof are the logical process behind the system itself (Thompson, 2007; Bunge, 1998; Carnap,
1991). Here below are the general scope of study by these sciences:
Table 1.1 – Different branches of sciences and each quest of knowledge according to their
respective fields and interests.
Life Sciences - Study life, its nature, origin and development and how possible for
it to exist on Earth
- Study different life forms, their characteristics, habitat, and means
of identifying, naming and classifying them
- Understand our own human body and its functions together with
our relationship with other living things
- Interaction of living things with other living things, under the
influence of non-living (abiotic) factors
-

Physical Sciences - Understand and predict physical events, processes, and phenomena
observed on Earth and the Universe
- Understand fundamental physical concepts about as matter,
energy, motion, physical and chemical reactions,
electromagnetism, gravity, radioactivity, classical and quantum
mechanics
-
Social Sciences - Describe and explain human behavior and consciousness

- describe and explain development and attributes of social
interactions and institutions, and progress of civilization and
humanity
- Study, compile and preserve knowledge and historical information
for the future
-
Formal Systems - Understand and utilize numbers, mathematical operations, logical

processes and formal languages which can also be useful in qualify
and quantify phenomena in nature
- Develop comprehensive paradigms and faculties for facilitation,
processing and transferring of data and information
-
Applied Sciences - Utilize and develop theoretical knowledge to purposive,

meaningful, and practical application and development of
technologies needed by human beings
Benefits of Science
Theoretical science helps us study and construct ideas and concepts as basis of scientific theories
which can explain things, events, and phenomena thus able for us to provide prediction of these
occurrence with precision and accuracy. With theoretical sciences, these theories are further
developed and utilized by applied science for purposive, meaningful and practical use.
Subsequently, the scientific knowledge is established and improved thus shall provide wide range
these related concepts of knowledge called paradigms that will be the basis of respective fields of
science and their allied disciplines in pursuing other endeavors and quest to knowledge (Kuhn and
Hacking, 2012).
Table 1.2 – Some of the greatest contributions to mankind by the modern science.
Life  Microbiological basis of infectious diseases (germ theory, Koch postulates)

Sciences  Discovery of cell and the concept of cell theory stating that the simplest form
of life is the cell and cell came from preexisting cells
 Discovery of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) and RNA (ribonucleic acid) as
molecules containing genetic information
 Understanding of anatomy and physiology leading to improvement of
different fields of medicine (vaccination, antibiotics, chemotherapy and drugs
discovery)
 Central dogma of Molecular Biology and its implication on genetic
manipulation (cross-breeding, genetic engineering, mutation and cancer)

Physical  Discovery of electricity and magnetism led to how electromagnetic energy

Sciences can be manipulated for general use such as light energy, radio waves
propagation for telecommunication and electrical current to transmit large
amount of electricity for general use

 Understanding of classical mechanics and thermodynamics principles led to

invention of efficient machines and equipment which can ease the burden of
work (steam and diesel engines, dynamos etc.)
 Theory of relativity gives us the view of matter, energy, time, space and
gravity at macroscopic to cosmological scale, leading us to develop satellite
technology (global positioning systems (GPS) and telecommunication
satellites)
 Quantum mechanics led us to deeper understanding of matter and energy at
microscopic scale of sub-atomic level, giving us means to explore
applications of electronics, thermonuclear energy of fission and fusion nuclear
reactions, semiconductors, communication and computational systems

Social  Improvement of economics, governance and education systems by laying

Sciences down theoretical and practical framework for the feasible, sustainable and
democratic approach on social problems and challenges (market systems,
government system, academic curriculums)
 Theories that precisely describes the phenomena of social behavior in humans
can effectively guide policy makers improve policy-making process to
formulate social planning programs applicable to the need of the society
(socioeconomic planning, social works and development)
 Understanding of the beginning and development of human society (e.g.
anthropology, archaeology, sociology, history)
 Preservation and transfer of human knowledge from generation to generation
(e.g. sociology, culture, tradition and language studies, history)

Formal  Mathematical and statistical symbols and operations, including logical

Systems processes and other types of formal languages are used as tools and models
aiding basic and applied research, engineering, computer programming and
automation
 Processors, database and data repository to manage big amounts of data and
information (internet servers, world wide web, fiber optics and satellite
telecommunication)

Applied  Telecommunication
Sciences  Medicine and Genetic Engineering
 Engineering and architecture
 Robotics and artificial intelligence (AI)
 Nanotechnology
Limitations of Science
Human knowledge is essentially differentiated by modern science as either scientific or non-

scientific. Scientific knowledge is the product of the elaborate process of scientific method. Non-
science is considered a separate body of knowledge as it cannot be falsified or reputed by science.
Thus, most of the science practitioners accept scientific method by as the most rational and
objective way of gathering scientific knowledge. However even of today, no consensus was agreed
by philosophers of science about the general logical and epistemological basis of scientific method
and science itself. Philosophers of science have offered different philosophical notions about
science that usually don’t agree with each other. Philosophy of science is a higher study of nature
of science aiming to answer fundamental questions like what constitutes science and the
qualification of scientific method in determining what science must be. Philosophical assumptions
like logical positivism has endured in modern science’s empiricism of treating scientific
knowledge, leading to criticism of the most well-known and influential science philosopher like
Karl Popper, Paul Feyerabend, Thomas Kuhn.

Karl Popper criticized that scientific theories aren’t product of empirical observation nor that the
correctness of those theories must be verified by these observations, also known as empirical
verification. Rather observations made is accorded to be explained by existing theories that
already preoccupies the science researcher; thus, if a correct observation disagrees with the theory
that the latter shall only be put in question and possibly revise (Popper, 2002). In this case, Popper
claimed that these theories can’t be always verified in every case but rather more applicable to be
reputed or falsified base on rational explanation of the occurrence observed; therefore, the
theories appearing insufficient in form are amended or revised to accommodate an explanation for
these new findings. This refers to what he called as empirical falsification in addition to this claim
that sometimes “bold hypotheses” based on existing theories are necessary to be initially claimed
as it will be the guiding knowledge for the whole scientific inquiry, until till it is refuted or falsified
by empirical evidences ((Popper, 2002; Godfrey-Smith, 2003). He added that the most rational
procedure of gaining scientific knowledge is trial-and-error, in which he stated that “boldly
proposing theories; of trying our best to show that these are erroneous; and of accepting them
tentatively if our critical efforts are unsuccessful” (Popper Lecture on 1959, webfiles.uci.edu),
meaning that scientist offers their own conjectures and subjected repeatedly to criticisms based on
empirical evidences, which can either the conjecture refuted or stand as the tested theory therefore
creating scientific knowledge in the process (Hansson, 2017).
With these notions, Popper saw the problem of induction, which hounds many scientific studies
especially experimentation and natural observation studies. Using induction reasoning, the
attributes of a subject is studied, given that most of the time there are only limited number of times
the subject was observed on certain instances, leading to the generalization about the subject
(Henderson, 2019). The logical dilemma then is formed that the findings may mistakenly led the
researcher to hasty infer about the subject even though there is a possibility that there would be
cases of exemptions not applicable to the whole population of the subject, or inadequately
represented by a limited number of samples and observation to arrive on a valid generalization
(see Figure 1.3). Another problem of induction is the presumption that a phenomenon that will
happen in the future should be observed as invariant and always the same as it was happened in
the past. David Hume postulated an unprovable assumption that the laws of physics remains the
same from the past and even to the future, applicable in any part of the Universe, called the
doctrine of uniformity (Hume and Beauchamp, 2000). Nevertheless, this principle even though
cannot be verified nor falsified is accepted as one of the philosophical foundations of modern
science.
Figure 1.3 – The Problem of Induction Reasoning. Through repeated observation and experience
of sun rising in the east, it is a valid inference by inductive reasoning that the sun always rises in
the east. However, the allegory of the “blind men and the elephant” provides us about the pitfalls
of inductive reasoning, as if limited observation and insufficient evidence, one can incorrectly infer
leading to hasty generalization.

On the other hand, the problem of demarcation as explained by Popper exposes the lack of
consensus regarding a criterion of determining scientific knowledge from non-scientific
knowledge. Popper offered a solution such that science, its theories and concepts is proven not by
verification but by process refutation or falsification based on existing empirical evidences, while
non-science offers knowledge that are mostly unfalsifiable due to limited empirical means of
testing those concepts. However, Feyerabend and Kuhn criticize Popper that the demarcation
issues between science and non-science is not significant because the scientific method inherently
poses limitation due to logical constraint as the consequence of its framework; and scientific
method essentially relies on philosophical assumptions that can’t be explain nor proven by science
itself. Yet, they reiterated that the rationality and objectivity of the science proponents and public
differs with respect to individual perspective and existing knowledge in the study.
Paul Feyerabend and Thomas Kuhn delved on the analysis of perennial philosophical problems
about the comparability of existing scientific theories and epistemological basis of scientific
method (Feyerabend, 1987; Kuhn and Hacking, 2012; Preston, 2016). The commensurability of
scientific theories depends on common, well-defined criteria and context of comparison; meaning
that for scientists to directly compare rival theories to determine their validity and realness, there
must be a “standard language” composed of “semantic” and “taxonomic” characterization that can
directly qualify or quantify the comparability of these theories (Feyerabend, 1981; Kuhn and
Hacking, 2012). Feyerabend and Kuhn both agree that theories and knowledge produced by
sciences for many years are mostly incommensurable to each other due to differences and
intricacies of paradigms involved: basically, questioning how these constituting concepts of these
paradigms were formed and assembled, and how these concepts were received and viewed
objectively and rationally to an agreeable degree as standard so these theories and knowledge can
be compared squarely and of equal footing. Feyerabend also reiterated that the concept of empirical
falsifiability will not be significant at this point of incommensurability since empirical evidences
are viewed in the light of existing theories or the researchers conjectures which can further lessen
the commensurability (Feyerabend, 1985; Feyerabend, 1981); thus, he concluded that no theory
even how scientific and convincing, is entirely agrees with all pertinent facts being studied
(Lakatos et al. 1999; Feyerabend, 1987).
Kuhn pointed out that many scientific theories are incommensurable, that each theory offers
different portrayal and explanation of phenomena in nature, and many of these rival theories aren’t
congruent nonetheless largely in disagreement to each other. He reiterated that the scientific
process naturally can never be fully objective and rational but rather also affected by the personal
perspective and presumption that directs the thinking of the scientists or researcher (Kuhn and
Hacking, 2012; Kuhn, 1977). With these, the theories constituting the paradigms, can contain
diverse concepts and pieces of knowledge that even though they are similar in context and field of
study, will vary from scientist to other scientist, in as much that these paradigms offer incompatible
notions of understanding about the subject of knowledge. Therefore, he defined scientific
paradigm as to scientific knowledge and “universally recognized achievements” that provides
“model problems and solutions” guiding scientists and researchers for a time until changed (Bird,
2018; Kuhn and Hacking, 2012; Kuhn, 1970).
Consequently, scientific knowledge thus advances according to existing scientific paradigms

which lays the methodologies, theoretical and conceptual background of the scientific process
itself, and not by comparing which is the better paradigm. Progress of knowledge takes place after
the existing paradigms were tested insufficient to explain the observation or as failure to predict
the occurrence of phenomena being studied (Nickles, 2017; Niiniluoto, 2015). Repeated
occurrence of serious incongruities in observational evidences causes the existing paradigms to
loss power of being a rational account of the phenomena being studied. Thus, a science practitioner
is compelled to one’s own perspective of objectivity and personal rationality to revise the old
paradigms, even to the point to discard the old and to propose a new theory that will accommodate
the new findings; these significant changes in the paradigm used in the scientific process leading
to novel discoveries and contribution to scientific knowledge: then Kuhn called the paradigm
shift, fueling scientific revolutions (Kuhn and Hacking, 2012; Kuhn, 1970).

As an example, the inadequacy of Aristotelian and Newtonian mechanics in describing the laws
governing the Universe were highlighted by Feyerabend that these theories were universally
accepted and valid on their respective time, until 20th century where they were superseded by
Einstein special and general theory of relativity because of the latter can accommodate the old data
and even more the anomalous data about the shift in the orbit of Mercury around the Sun and the
bending of light by massive in which the former theories failed to provide rational explanation and
prediction of the said occurrence (Feyerabend, 1993). Surprisingly, the Einstein’s theory of
relativity during his time apparently appears not so useful, yet controversial and revolutionary that
it rocked the established theory of physics that time, and most of its postulates and concepts were
initially unfalsifiable and unverifiable but rather based on the “thought experiment”, or mental
visualization of the phenomena; since the existing paradigm at that time is not adequate to perform
enough empirical observation and practical testing of the theory (Brush, 1999).
Thus, Kuhn and Feyerabend both agree that the scientific method has its limitation and thus can
never be the only universal approach in explaining nature, nor it can be better than non-scientific
theories and concepts in explaining many phenomena and subjects (Kuhn, 1977). Somewhat, they
pointed out that science being established with its inseparable logical processes, inevitably is also
a social process influenced by the science practitioners and the public receiving science.
Feyerabend nevertheless postulated the tendency of modern science to lose its philosophical
grounds and therefore to be succumb to its dogmatic use of scientific method due to its limitations
(Lakatos et al., 1999). At the epistemological basis, he added that due to logical constraint about
the nature of science, the scientific method doesn’t have the exclusive grounds on determining the
truth, nor it is consistent in providing theories that will describe the entirety of the Universe. Kuhn
and Feyerabend, reiterates the role of social processes and non-scientific body of knowledge as
another source of knowledge which cannot be provided by modern science, in understanding and
inquiring some of the most enduring questions about life, reality, beauty, morality and spirituality
such as the following:
1) What is good and what is bad? (Ethics). Science and scientific method on itself don’t have
its own heuristic of morality, thus evaluate scientific knowledge based on the ethical notion
of “good” and “bad”. Scientific process employs logic, rationality and objectivity in
analysis to arrive on valid conclusions according to facts and empirical evidences (Teller,
1998; Lutz and Lenman, 2018)
2) What is beauty and beautifulness? (Aesthetics). Even thought the appreciation of beauty
employs empirical observation meaning use of the bodily senses, science has no direct
means to evaluate the values involved in appreciation of what is beauty and ‘beautiful’
science concepts. However, it is profound that science touches the curiosity and passion of
science practitioners thereby expressing their personal fascination and attraction to their
respective scientific endeavor (Engler, 1994). Also, today neuroscientists are currently
active in finding the neurobiological roots of sensation and aesthetic experiences
(Shimamura, 2011).
3) What is knowledge and essence of knowledge? (Epistemology). Science aims for the quest
of knowledge and truth. It is written in history that modern science traced itself from its
philosophical roots. Also, science holds to many philosophical concepts that can not be
explained by science itself nor why science uses these concepts: yet it is evident that
knowledge do progresses (Kuhn and Hacking, 2012; Lakatos et al., 1999). It is still a debate
on many philosophers of science about what constitutes science as science, and elucidate
fundamental concepts describing scientific knowledge.
4) What is reality or what is real? Is the human mind can perceive real things or the product
of our mental and cognitive faculties affects our perception of reality itself?
(Metaphysics). Metaphysics of science aims to answer the reality of laws of nature, to
expound the scientific concepts cause, effect and relationship to other concepts based on
reality of these concepts, including the effect of our perception and existence to the
understanding of these concepts (Gohner and Schrenk, iep.utm.edu)

5) What is the purpose of life on the Universe? Are there other life forms out there?
(Cosmology).
6) Why are we here? What is our existence? Is there a Supreme Being? (Religion).
7) What constitutes a “good” culture? What is legality of law? Is a concept or idea that it not
empirically observable, testable, verifiable, and falsifiable (quantum entanglement,
relativistic implications, dark matter, dark energy, fate of the Universe, unobservable
Universe, mathematics, God, spirits, human consciousness, emotions, etc.) not science? If
they are reality or real prior knowledge, then why are they cannot be described as Science?
Even today, there are many realities, concepts and ideas that cannot be explained or understand on
the scientific context, like the complexities of human behavior, non-scientific knowledge being
studied by the disciplines of humanities, religion, and philosophy. Thus, it is a necessity to
understand the difference between scientific knowledge and non-scientific knowledge, base on the
limitation of science as a body of knowledge.
STSE as Science Education
In face of digital information, globalization, cultural mixing, environmental degradation,

socioeconomic and sociopolitical challenges, it is a must for us to study science education to
increase understanding thus social involvement to address societal problems through science and
technology (Mansour, 2009; Pedretti, 2005; Aikenhead, 2003; Longino, 2016). These include
some general approach on how we can study science and technology:
 Philosophical – This perspective of understanding the aspects science and technology is

explained in terms of philosophical and logical background of sciences: an inquiry about
the knowledgeableness, meaningfulness, rationality, believability of sciences to our
perspectives as recipient of it;
 Historical – The historicity of science can never be underestimated, since the
chronological and narrative background of the development of society and human
knowledge leading to advancement of science and technology can give us a light on how
the progress of human civilization and its influences have contributed to its change; and,
 Social – A societal and practical approach giving us an applied, issue-based and realistic
point-of-view about science and technology: relevant and timely issues which has
significant effect on the society and human lives.
Therefore, it is STSE main role in educating students and winning public interest regarding the
benefits and limitations of modern science (Aikenhead, 2005). The fruits of scientific knowledge
have greatly shaped the social institutions of the society and has fashioned many disciplines
directing many of human endeavors such as the advancement of technology and improvement of
quality of life, nevertheless its drawbacks and repercussions (Jasanoff, 2003). It is crucial to know
that science have evolved dramatically from the beginning of mankind until today due to it being
highly tied to the development of the human society and civilization (Kuhn and Hacking, 2012);
and to understand it is we must trace back the philosophical, historical and social background of
science.

REALITY AND APPLICATION
“Scientia potentia est”
The whole world was awed of nuclear technology, after the United States dropped the atomic bomb
at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan on 1945, ending the World War II. It was the first and only
time that nuclear energy was used as a weapon in war, against a belligerent nation, and since then
nuclear weapons were developed by countries like Russia then Soviet Union, France, China, and
the United Kingdom. Also, India, Pakistan and Israel have made to join the nuclear club due to
their respective interest.
Nuclear physics proves to be a powerhouse of knowledge providing great theoretical details of

nuclear fission and nuclear fusion, caveats of technological marvels from Becquerel and Curies’
discovery of radioactivity until Teller and Ulam had solved their nuclear reaction problems for the
design of a thermonuclearly effective hydrogen bomb. Nevertheless, it provided us more useful
applications of nuclear fervor: smoke detectors, x-ray radiographs, radioisotopes for radiation
therapy, gamma ray’s food sterilizers, and nuclear powerplants are one of the few examples of
peaceful nuclear energy in action.
Aside from nuclear energy, can you name other scientific marvels with very promising
contributions to mankind, yet with dreadful consequences?

PART 2 – Science as a System of Knowledge
Introduction
Human knowledge is essentially differentiated by modern science as either scientific or non-

scientific. Scientific knowledge is the product of the elaborate process of scientific method which
is generally accepted by science practitioners as the most rational and objective approach in
gathering scientific knowledge. These makes non-scientific knowledge as distinct body of
knowledge as many of its concepts and idea cannot be verified, falsified or reputed by known
scientific processes; thus, these pose some fundamental nature of science. Philosophy of science
aims to elucidate the nature of science and limitation of science as body of knowledge. Even today,
there are many realities, concepts and ideas that cannot be explained or understand on the scientific
context, like the complexities of human behavior, non-scientific knowledge being studied by the
disciplines of humanities, religion philosophy. Nevertheless, these defines modern science as a
systematic body of knowledge which are tested through the processes of scientific method
(Wilson, 1998; Heilbron, 2003). Nevertheless, it is a paramount consideration to understand the
fact that modern science covers interdisciplinary fields and disciplines from life sciences, physical
sciences, social sciences, formal systems, applied sciences. Technology meanwhile refers not only
about the set of modern disciplines, skills, and inventions, but also to those even existed during
the ancient times, from humans societies and civilization that have yielded considerable vast
knowledge and technological feats (Krebs and Krebs, 2003).
Figure 2.1 - Modern Science is a systematic body of knowledge comprises of different scientific
disciplines and fields and many of it are have related concepts and ideas, and overlapping scope
of studies and interest.
In this lesson we are going to delve in the fundamental understanding of the observed realities,
concepts and ideas in our daily lives, and how it forms the systematic body of knowledge which
we known today as modern science. We are to explore the intricacies of scientific knowledge, to
comprehend that the observation of different occurrences and phenomena in daily life of human
beings molds our thinking; and, realize the relationship of our perception and thinking about the
about ourselves and our surroundings contributes to a greater system of knowledge.

Understanding a “system”
“System” is a common byword of the masses, used in different connotations and contexts in the
society such as scientists organizing their theories, public administrators and politicians for policy-
making, economic and business enterprises such as stock exchange and banking system, and even
from daily affairs like people falling in line at the cashier counter of a department store, or traffic
scheme implemented on national highways and roads. Also, “system” is attached to well-known
catchwords in the society such as mathematical systems, educational systems, information
systems, car’s transmission system, social security system, and the solar system. Nevertheless of
the usage, it is worth noting that there is a common ideas and concepts about “system” such that it
denotes relationship, order, arrangement, causality and reality; also, it denotes parts forming a
whole, or whole dissected into parts, or components that are interconnected to each other. Yet it is
also worth to notice that “systems” even though are defined and used interchangeably on
differently in natural sciences (thermodynamics, chemistry, ecology, etc.), social sciences
(geography, sociology, psychology, etc.), formal sciences (mathematics, logic, computer
languages, etc.) and humanities (philosophy, arts, history etc.).
Though used accordingly different by many disciplines of knowledge, generally "system" is

defined as an arranged group of things, occurrences, perception and/or thinking that are reliantly
connected and reliant to each other, which generally holds to an actual observation, pattern,
orientation, concept, and/or idea: as this was defined by Bertalanffy (1969) and Miller (1978).
Thus a “system” explicitly and implicitly present goals and objectives to be attained, which will
make the “system” itself sensical and useful (Miller and Miller, 1992; Miller and Miller, 1993):
thus, the basic assumptions under the systems theory, as the current mainstream theory which
explain the philosophical and sociological foundations of “system” (Bertalanffy, 1950;
Bertalanffy, 1969; Miller, 1978; Kauffman, 1995). Namely, the main features of a “systems” are
stated below:
 Existing interrelationship between the parts of the system must exist, meaning the
components are able to rationally and logically fit to each other;
 Possesses interdependence between the parts of the system with the ability for each part to
describe or support each other with respect to the whole “system” itself;
 The framework, either theoretical or realistic, meaning to the substance and essence of the
association of the parts forming the whole as a system, precedes the importance of the
parts; and,
 A system has a structure, order and arrangement of its components making it logical and
useful.
Subtleties of a “System”
A system is usually composed of a smaller component system called subsystem. A subsystem on

itself is a system comprised of more basic components. Also, a system is distinct on its own such
that it possesses a delineation of its own elements divided from those which are separated or not
congruent to it, thus having an interface from the outside. The outside of the system is generally
called the surrounding such the interface that delineate or divide is called boundary. The boundary
can be discrete or continuous with the surroundings, thus a system can be classified as open, closed,
and isolated. An open system allows in and out of matter, energy, and information with its
surroundings, while a closed system allows exchange of energy but not matter, thus also
information. In an isolated system, matter and energy cannot pass in nor the ones inside to go out,
thus very limited to nil information about the system. Still, a “system” is an intellectual framework
created by us humans to picture-out, describe, and study our understanding about ourselves and
the environment, influenced by our perception of the realities, and our worldviews about different
issues in life, thus natural and man-made systems must be delineated. Conversely, nature is
defined as the totality of all things which includes all matter, energy, processes, and information

in the Universe, including us humans. However, it is our common conception to draw boundary
between ourselves, the surroundings and nature.
Table 2.1 – Some of the most important systems that have much concern and interest to
humans (Bertalanffy, 1969; Miller, 1978; Kauffman, 1995).
These refers to real, concrete, and physical objects, occurrences, and phenomena
in the known physical Universe. Most of the elements and components of these
Physical
systems are the known physical stuffs comprising of matter, energy, space, and
systems
time which are the general subjects of the fields of natural sciences from
physical sciences to and life sciences.
These are systems comprising of universally logical abstract entities, rules, and
Formal concepts in which humans have been expressing and studying using arbitrary
systems sets of symbols and signs arbitrarily called “formal language”. These generally
involved of logical, mathematical, and probability mechanisms.
Socio-cultural systems are composed of anthropogenic components primarily

Socio- attributed due to inherent human attributes (both biological and behavioral) and
cultural other resultant factors such as social order, linguistics, cultures, norms, values,
systems and world views. Many disciplines are concerned on the study of socio-cultural
systems, from social sciences to humanities.
Conceptual systems are composed of concepts and ideas which denote either the
abstract and/or physical entities. A conceptual system depends on the observer
Conceptual that was performing an observation and conceptualization of a
systems framework/model of things and events of concern and being studied with.
Logical, mathematical, or both can be used as to define and describe the system
through use of a language.
Artificial systems are usually human-made attribution of relationship and

Artificial connection of things which are not naturally observed in nature. Example of
systems these are traffic scheme systems, Linnaean taxonomy classification, and Dewey
library system.

Figure 2.1 – A “system” is an intellectual framework created by us humans to picture-out,

describe, and study our understanding about ourselves and the environment. A system is a point
of interest/study, consist of parts (subsystems), working together as a whole or a large unit.
On the other hand, it is very important to understand that any system uses the most fundamental
concepts of human knowledge, which is philosophy (Stenlund, 1990; Friedenberg and Silverman,
2016). To reiterate this philosophical nature of a system, the use of languages and semantics is
very crucial in understanding systems; such language is a system itself comprising of logical,
mental/cognitive and social constructs that supports the structure and facilitate the mechanisms of
the system: primarily syntax and semantics play as a crucial scaffolding of languages, such as the
former provides rules, order and notation (signs and symbols), while the latter deals about the
meanings and interpretations of languages and its modalities. Languages are classified as the
following: natural languages, meaning those languages that were commonly expressed, spoken,
and written, by humans such as Filipino, English, Chinese, and Sign languages; formal languages,
notations and processes of logic and mathematics; and, artificial languages which were used in
computer programming and information technology.
Aside from its components, a system can still be further analyzed based on its spatial (space) and
temporal (time) factors, meaning a system can still be further characterize it either dynamic
(changing or varying) or static (constant or unchanging) system. Thus, it is also crucial to
understand that the systems can also serve as mechanism or process of change primarily in the
processing of information so knowledge; and these provide the basic concept of theoretical and
conceptual framework used in research methodologies and experimental protocols (Seibt, 2018;
Williams, 1985; Hassan et al., 2018).

Figure 2.1 – A “system” is an intellectual framework with an input, process and output (IPO)
modalities. Here a scientific method is an excellent example of how a system changes through
time and different landscape.
Sciences as Systems of Concepts about Nature, Society, and Knowledge
In the beginning 13.75 billion years ago that the first atoms of hydrogen, helium, lithium, and other
chemical elements of lighter nucleus appeared in our Universe, immediately after energy, time
and space were created. Energy had been undergoing further process of differentiation for some
time to form matter, so the first atoms and the elements, and the fundamental interactions in
nature which is until to the future (until today, this moment that you are reading this book) shall
determine the laws that governs the organization, order of nature and ultimately the fate of our
known Universe (see figure below). Few billion years after the start of creation of the Universe,
the first stars shone having started nuclear reaction at their core, thus forming heavier chemical
elements like iron, nickel and gold. Great masses of matter like gases and dusts were pulled to
themselves and then to apart due to effects of gravitational force and dark energy working together,
forming intricates of celestial structures from colossal super-clusters of galaxies to small star
systems.

Table 2.2 – Some of the most important phenomena observed by human beings, with the field of
sciences and scientific concepts that covers the interest of study.
Natural Field of Sciences and Important

Order in Nature Scientific Concepts
Physical Sciences
Strong Nuclear Force or “Strong Force” - Atomic stability
One of the fundamental interactions of nature, - Nuclear Fusion and Fission
this attractive force is necessary to hold the - Quantum Mechanics
particles that forms the nucleons (protons and - String Theory (hypothetically)
neutrons) and binds them together in the nucleus
of an atom, thus atoms and elements are formed. Applied Sciences
Formal Sciences
Weak Nuclear Force or “Weak Force” Physical Sciences

This repulsion force is necessary to the stability - Atomic stability
of the nucleus of an atom. This force is necessary - Radioactivity and Nuclear Reactions
to split unstable heavy atoms to form more stable - Mechanics
lighter elements. - String Theory (hypothetically)
Physical Sciences
- Classical Mechanics
- Quantum Mechanics
- Chemistry
Electromagnetic Force
This force either attractive or repulsive, is Life Sciences
essential to some of the most common important - Life
physical phenomena to man such as light, - Biochemistry
electricity, magnetism and chemical reactions. - Metabolism
- Photosynthesis
Applied Sciences
Formal Sciences
Physical Sciences
- Newtons Universal Law of Gravitation
- Theory of Relativity (Special and
Gravitational Force General Relativity)
This attraction force is the effect of the mass of - String Theory (hypothetically to
a matter in time-space dimension. Matter has combine Relativity with Quantum
mass and occupy space exerting curvature to Mechanics)
the time-space, causing nearby matter to curve
towards another nearby matter, thus causing Life Sciences
them to attract and hold the two objects to each - Extraterrestrial life (hypothetically)
other (Feynman et al., 1995). - Exobiology/Astrobiology
Applied Sciences
Formal Sciences

Dark Energy
Hypothetical explanation in observed Physical Sciences
astronomical phenomena of expansion of the Possibly undiscovered laws of physics
Universe. This energy is thought to be due to yet the only existing paradigm that
the intrinsic property of vacuum of space and explain it is the theory of Relativity
time-space itself expanding, pulling the matter (Special and General Relativity)
in the Universe away from each other. Dark
energy is thought to cause the expansion of the Formal Sciences
Universe. Never been observe directly.
Physical Sciences
Visible Matter or “Ordinary Matter” and its
counterpart, the Antimatter
- Quantum Mechanics
Also known as “baryonic matter” since this
- Theory of Relativity
matter is essentially made up of atoms which
- Chemistry
nucleus is composed of subatomic particles
“protons” and “neutrons”. There are known 124
Life Sciences
elements known to man and these are
- Biology
essentially made up of atoms. Antimatter are
- Ecology
almost the same with known matter, except it
- Microbiology
has an opposite charge and different quantum
- Biochemistry
properties. In contact, antimatter and matter
- Metabolism
annihilate each other from existence producing
large amount of energy and new particles of
Applied Sciences
matter (Smorra et al., 2017).
Social Sciences
Formal Sciences
Dark Matter or “Invisible Matter”

These are “exotic matter” in which their nature
is still unknown since they don’t emit light nor Physical Sciences
interact with visible matter, but only affected by Possibly undiscovered laws of physics
gravity as calculated from its gravitational yet the only existing paradigm that
effect (as the missing or unaccounted mass explain it is the theory of Relativity
minus total mass of visible matter in a galaxy) (Special and General Relativity)
and unexplained halo effects observed from
telescopic views of galaxies.
Physical Sciences
- Quantum Mechanics
- Theory of Relativity
- Chemistry
Energy Life Sciences

Is physical concept regarding the ability to - Biology
perform work. Related to energy is power, - Ecology
meaning the amount of work performed in a - Microbiology
given amount of time. - Biochemistry
- Physiology
- Metabolism
Applied Sciences
Social Sciences
Formal Sciences

It was 50000 BCE that humans have fully utilized our physical, biological and psychological
adaptation which led to our species Homo sapiens sapiens survival and flourishing, we have
acquired new type of adaptation based on social interaction and behavioral modernity called
cultural adaptation such as technology, tools, religion, arts, daily subsistence such as food and
water, settlement and rituals (d’Errico and Stringer, 2011; Nowell, 2010). The complexity of
social interactions and culture have evolved due time which also caused the social role of each
member in a community to evolve, leading to the formation of human society. In anthropological
and sociological perspective, human culture exists and evolves due to complex interaction of
factors, producing cultural diversity or multitudes of forms and customs observed in different
societies. Humans have shared experiences, social interactions and communication through a long
and dramatic evolution of human knowledge and our intellect. Nevertheless, the complexity of
the social structure or order, or observable social patterns within a group of humans or between
the groups of humans can be traced on the development of human culture. As we humans realized
our contribution within our group called community, we realized that our social status in the
social structure is defined by our respective functions or role, leading to what will be our identity
in the society (see figure below). Regardless of cultural diversity and environmental differences,
different human cultures have shared a common pattern and similarity in terms of development of
human knowledge and its effect on the advancement of the human society.
Figure 2.2 – The socio-cultural systems of human society and human civilization are such complex
systems, composed and influenced by anthropogenic and environmental factors. We humans are
part of that system and our place is further shaped by the culture and social structure. The system
is such a dynamic one that for only not more than 100000 years ago, we have drastically induced
change on Earth (d’Errico and Stringer, 2011; Nowell, 2010).

Generally, humans are conscious, thinking animals with the cognitive faculties to learn and to
make sound reasoning. Thus, humans’ do reason by mentally processing information in an
analytical (scrutinize information to its details) and critical (compare information to other
information) way of thinking, aiming to arrive with a comprehensive and rational idea, concept or
conclusion. We have devised concepts and ideas called paradigms, consisting of methodologies
on how we determine an idea and concept as “knowledgeable” through our information gathering
and reasoning. Also, roughly the same meaning, paradigm is the human perspective or “point-of-
view” regarding knowledge. Sometimes information drawn to the perspective of a philosopher is
not the same with regards to a natural scientist. However, together these constitute the basis of
human understanding where we humans have gained over time, have shared with each other, and
have persisted and changed with us, known as knowledge (Heilbron, 2003; Wilson, 1998). The
main endeavors of human knowledge have emerged to the systems we know today as Philosophy,
Sciences, Religion, Society, Civilization and Humanities.
Figure 2.3 – Human knowledge is a system on its own and, science just play a part on the
systematic body of human knowledge.
Scientific knowledge is the product of the elaborate process of scientific method. Non-science is
considered a separate body of knowledge as it cannot be falsified or reputed by science. Thus,
most of the science practitioners accept scientific method by as the most rational and objective
way of gathering scientific knowledge. Though, no agreement is reached until today about the
fundamental epistemological basis of science; in as much that there many realities and phenomena
in life that cannot be explained nor clarified by modern science. Accordingly, philosophy of
science is a higher study about the nature of science aiming to answer fundamental questions like
what constitutes science and the qualification of scientific method in determining what science
must be.
In this lesson we are going to delve about the nature of knowledge. So, we are about to explore
and analyze the basic principles of philosophy, as the essential framework of scientific processes:
to comprehend the role of philosophy and human behavior in the deeper understanding of modern
sciences, nevertheless will give light to deeper understanding of science.

Systematic Body of Knowledge
Generally, humans are conscious, thinking animals with the cognitive faculties to learn and to
make sound reasoning. Thus, humans’ do reason by mentally processing information in an
analytical (scrutinize information to its details) and critical (compare information to other
information) way of thinking, aiming to arrive with a comprehensive and rational idea, concept or
conclusion (Ichikawa et al., 2018). Conversely, the basic unit of human knowledge is the mental
faculties of idea and concept, basically attributing characteristics which describes and defines
something real, imaginary or abstract (Margolis and Laurence, 2014; Longino, 2016; Samet,
2008). Example of these is the use of language, the main conveyor of knowledge by humans either
written, oral, or signaled. Visual representation or the actual observation or experience (see Figure
3.1).
Deductive reasoning is inferring that a premise (e.g. claim, conjecture, general statement) is valid
or applicable then the terms that follow (or under) after the premise is similarly valid or applicable
also. Informally known as the “up to bottom logic”, meaning that if an argument or theory is true
then must be the sub-concepts must also be. In other words, general ideas or concepts are used to
explain more specific ideas or concepts; that the general principles explain the reasons behind
special or individual cases. On the other hand, inductive reasoning or “bottom to up logic” is in
the opposite direction of inference compared to deductive reasoning; the premises are the terms of
proofs to arrive to valid conclusion. Meaning specific ideas or concepts are used to explain more
general ideas or concepts; individual or special cases explain to find a more general principle
(Henderson, 2019). Abductive reasoning however is inference of finding simplest idea or concept
among the "the best explanations" that explain an idea or concept of interest, based from an
observation.
APPLE
Apple
Mansanas
Malus pumila
Figure 2.4 - The idea and concept of Idea and Concept of an apple. An idea of an “apple” depends
on our perception and reasoning of attributes or characteristics that defines and delineate and
“apple”. A concept of an “apple” depends on the ideas you are thinking about an “apple”. Apple
can be spoken or written in different forms and languages (upper left), or can be creatively
represented by an illustration (upper middle), or can actual image of an apple (upper right). We
can also identify an “apple” as the fruit, leaves, branches or the tree itself (lower left) depending
on how we relate ideas and concepts with other ideas and concepts. An apple pie (lower right) is
not an apple pie with apples, but is it correct to say that the apple pie is also an apple? On a different
context, “Apple” can be associated with a well-known brand of computer and cellular phone.

Logic is the branch of philosophy that studies the aspects of reasoning: aiming to arrive at valid
justification, judgement, affirmation or rejection of ideas and concepts we humans understood and
reasoned either deductively, inductively, or abductively about things in nature and life are
systematically and thematically arranged and formed a paradigm or conglomerate of knowledge
either theoretical or practical purpose (Ichikawa et al., 2018; Longino, 2016). With these,
relationship of things in nature can be understood by making representations, simulations and
symbols of ideas and concepts called conceptual models (see Figure 3.2; Margolis et al. 2014;
Craver and Tabery, 2017). Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy that studies the nature of
reality, existence and causality of things and what constitute to these fundamental concepts.
Cause Effect
Cause (C) Effect (E) (C) (E)
I II
E3 C4 E9
E12
C9 C8 C1 C2 C6 E7
E10 C3 C5 III
Figure 2.5 - The Causality. The three examples of conceptual model above are the models about
causality, called causal model in which we can understand such that, I) single cause then leads to
single effect, a model showing linear relationship, II) single cause then leads to a single effect
which is also the cause of that effect, a model showing non-linear, cyclic relationship, and III)
many causes leading to many effects affecting it each other or not, a model showing complex
relationship.
With logical reasoning we have developed complex ideas, concepts and their relationships in the
form of hypothesis, theories, justifications, beliefs and values. The way and manner we developed
these ideas and concepts depending on our ability of reasoning and perception on the reality around
us (see Figure 3.3). With these paradigms were made and it is pervasive in the evolution of human
endeavors of civilizations, sciences and humanities that it is also changing or adapting to meet the
needs of the advancement of human knowledge. This significant change in approaches how we
pursue knowledge is paradigm shift. Paradigm shifts then leads to revolutionary changes not only
on the knowledge itself but also to human culture and society, which we see the effects as
innovations (). Different perspectives have created multitudes of different disciplines and
approaches we reasoned and understood knowledge. However, it is notable that these perspectives
or paradigms share basic similarities like reasoning, ideas and concept.

Figure 2.6 – This conceptual model showing the relationship between reasoning and the level of
knowledge involved.
Epistemology seeks to answer the fundamental questions about the nature of knowledge,
rationality, objectivity and justification (Perla, 2011; Parikh et al., 2017). The under lying
principles regarding the what to be considered as knowledge, the scope and justification of belief
(see Figure 3.4). Philosophy inquires about the aspects of reality, existence, intellect, wisdom,
knowledge, endeavor and beauty.

Figure 2.7 – Aristotle is one of the first philosopher more definite in describing knowledge, known
as the tripartite model of knowledge. According to this theory, knowledge is something that can
be justified, true, and believed as indicated JTB in the Venn Diagram. However, some modern
philosophers have proposed the extended tripartite model, meaning JT, TB and JB is also part of
knowledge depending on the logical approach and paradigm of learning. JT means something that
is justified and true, however is not believed; TB is something that can be true and believed but
not justified; and, JB stands for something that can be justified and believed but not true.
Knowledge and the Human Experience
For thousands of years, philosophers are still puzzled about the nature of knowledge and the role
of human intellect in shaping human knowledge dating back from Plato until today. Yet, majority
of philosophers agreed that knowledge depends on our understanding the relationship truths,
beliefs, and our justifications using our intellect. Philosophers generally agree that humans have
been able to develop knowledge that: we humans are naturally conscious and rational animals,
curious of ourselves and the surroundings; we naturally aim to understand reality and our
existence; we naturally aim to understand and achieve what is good, correct, and acceptable;
we “know” or “understand” things for practically utilizing it for a purpose; we since the
prehistoric times have been developing and organizing human knowledge; and we pursue
knowledge because of knowledge itself. Thus, philosophers have offered some of the well-known
philosophical approach on understanding knowledge and have influenced the progress of modern
science (Smith, 2003; Rescher, 1999):
 Rationalism. This theory states that the human ability to think and reason is the best of
finding and achieving knowledge either dependent or independent of empirical evidences.
Also, rationalism states that there are concepts and truths that can only be known and
understood through logical and rational thinking without depending on direct experience

or cannot be directly observe by the senses (Markie, 2017). Human knowledge is “fallible”
or can be doubtful, however that fallibility or doubtfulness we are thinking tells us that
undoubtedly, we are really thinking and reasoning. Therefore, knowledge is real and
attainable, and we just need to do is to think, reason again and then acquire knowledge
again (Dea et al., 2017).
 Realism. In realism, knowledge approximates the truth and existence of things in this
world. The reality of the things in this world is independent of our mind and how we
perceive and understood those things. The possibility is that our minds can limited by our
perception and understanding of these things in this world. Thus, it is our aim to pursue
learning and studying to arrive with the exactness and completeness of understanding of
the things in the world (Miller, 2016).
 Idealism. Idealism tells us that knowledge is naturally the product of our mind, and the
“reality we know” is significantly based on our own thinking and reasoning not only of
actual experience and observation of the “reality” itself (Guyer and Horstmann, 2018).
Idealism also states that there is “a priori”, reason or knowledge independent of experience,
and “a posteriori” meaning reason or knowledge dependent on direct experience by the
senses. Thereby knowledge is also dependent considering the objectivity of our reasoning.
 Existentialism. The theory reiterates that the human’s own individual experience and
perspective of the reality is the only meaningful in arriving to knowledge. There is no
definite or standard means of knowing all the knowledge since humans cannot on
themselves will know it all. Knowledge is attained through self’s own effort, freedom and
volition and not necessary influenced by external interferences. Also, it is the aim of man
to exist first then is the essence of life (Crowell, 2017).
 Pragmatism. Pragmatism states the main aim of knowledge is of successful utilization.

Our mind, understanding, reasoning, perceptions, beliefs and learning must reflect practical
purpose and any approach or methods must be founded on applicability and effectiveness
of ideas and concepts, thus knowledge (Hookway, 2017).
 Constructivism. According to Constructivism, human knowledge is the product of

continual buildup of ideas and concepts tested with time by humans. Base on the progress
of human societies, humans acquire, compare and scrutinize the accumulation of facts and
theories which then either assimilated to our preexisting body of knowledge, otherwise
discarded. Also, the constructivist view knowledge as parts that is assembled through
gradual, step-by-step process (Kuhn, 1970).
 Epistemological Anarchism. This theory states that there is no universal approach or

method central to the growth of knowledge that has cannot be limited by the consequences
of logical and epistemological assumption that any methods assumed of. It holds that the
idea of the operation of science by fixed, universal rules is unrealistic, pernicious, and
detrimental to science itself. The use of the term anarchism in the name reflected the
methodological pluralism prescription of the theory, as the purported scientific method
does not have a monopoly on truth or useful results (Lakatos et al., 1990).

Rationalism
French mathematician, scientist and philosopher Rene

Descartes (1596–1650) is best known for his philosophical
work “Meditations on First Philosophy” and the
“Cartesian” Coordinate system named in his honor,
connecting geometry and algebra. Together with Spinoza
and Leibniz, he is the main proponent of the Rationalism,
known for his famous saying “I think, therefore I am”.
Realism
Painting of the two great Greek philosophers, Plato (left)

and Aristotle (right) discoursing. A former student of
Socrates, Plato (approx. 428 – 347 BCE) together with his
student Aristotle (384–322 BCE) have greatly influenced
Western Philosophy. They are also the main proponent of
the philosophy Realism.
Idealism
Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) is a German philosopher

known for his magnum opus “Critique of Pure Reason”
aimed to bridge the philosophical gaps between reason
and direct experiences by the senses.

Existentialism
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) was the best known

philosopher of Existentialism. His most notable works are
the “Apollonian and Dionysian”, “Zarathustra” and the
concept of “Ubermensch” (German word literally
meaning “superman”). His analysis of truth knowledge
have been based on “perspectivism” and thus “nihilism”.
Pragmatism
American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–

1914) is the best known advocate of pragmatism. An
accomplished logician, mathematician, and scientist, he
developed pedagogical concepts on aiming and attaining
knowledge based on its purpose and practicality. He also
stated that the methodologies of learning knowledge
should be based on the principle of purpose and
practicality. His concept is most known today as the
“Peirce pragmatic maxim”.
Constructivism
American philosopher Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996) is well

known for his 1962 book “The Structure of Scientific
Revolutions” describing the history of intellectual
revolutions, societal changes and its impact on the
advancement of scientific knowledge. Also, he stated there
in introducing the would-be famous term “paradigm shift”
which most philosopher of science, science historians and
sociologist have adapted.

Photograph by
Grazia Borrini-Feyerabend
Epistemological Anarchism
Attributed by his critics as “the worst enemy of science”, Austrian philosopher of science Paul
Feyerabend (1924-1994) works on incommensurability of theories and concepts and
epistemological limitation of scientific method. Due to these, he pressed that science doesn’t
have the monopoly of describing knowledge and truth. He warned that modern science has the
tendency to succumb to its own dogmatic view of knowledge due to the stated constraint. Thus,
he pointed out the necessity of public involvement in science not only monopolized by science
practitioners.
Differentiated from other historical sciences, modern science is a well-defined organization of

human knowledge through a systematic and methodological inquiry called scientific method.
Philosophy of science aims to study what is the nature of science, what constitutes sciences and
the limitation of science (Smith, 2003; Bunge, 1998). Universe is the totality of matter, energy,
time, space, events and phenomena including the humans that are studying it. Also,
interchangeably from the Greek word “cosmos” literally meaning “order” and “world”, Cosmos
in-broad sense denotes to the humans’ collective understanding of all things around us including
ourselves as humans. Cosmology or the study of all the things in the Universe itself and is studied
through physical (scientific), religious, and philosophical approaches. Historically, the formal
study of sciences can be traced from cultural, religious and philosophical background of human
knowledge.
The Copernican System by Polish

astronomer and mathematician
Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543).
Copernicus with his revolutionary
“heliocentric model” have
challenged and swatted away the
almost 1300 years long reign of
“geocentric model” of Claudius
Ptolemy (100 –170).

From the old philosophical understanding of the cosmos, the leap from geocentric model of the
Universe to heliocentric model made astronomy to progress very much as a scientific discipline of
knowledge. These paradigm shift have led to what we known as the “Copernican Revolution” of
the Renaissance era (Kuhn, 1970; Nickles, 2017). Yet the Copernicus model is not enough to
describe the motions of planets observed from the night skies, unlike what we known today. Still,
his theory has laid its important contribution and to the advancement of knowledge in natural
science. A paradigm is mainly consisting of methodologies we determine idea and concept as
“knowledgeable” through our information gathering and reasoning. Also, roughly the same
meaning, paradigm is the human perspective or “point-of-view” regarding knowledge. Sometimes
information drawn to the perspective of a philosopher is not the same with regards to a natural
scientist.
However, together these constitute the basis of human understanding where we humans have
gained over time, have shared with each other, and have persisted and changed with us, known as
knowledge (see Figure 3.5). The main endeavors of human knowledge have emerged to the
systems we know today as Philosophy, Sciences, Religion, Society, Civilization and
Humanities.
Figure 2.8 – The systematic body of human knowledge. The Venn diagram shows that philosophy
both encompasses the sciences and humanities.

“The Mind-Body Problem”
One of the most enduring unsolved problems in sciences and philosophy is mind-body problem.
Scientists and philosophers are still puzzled how the physical brain and the biochemical processes
and the intricacies are able to produce what we known as the human consciousness? Also
interesting how is our mind able to grasp information and perceive reality which then processed
and stored as thought and memory in our brain?
Many biophysicist, neuropsychologists, metaphysicists and epistemologists have offered many

hypotheses but none have been successful to explain the mind and body relationship.
How do we know that we know?

Did you saw your actual brain to prove that you have a brain and thinking?
How do I know that you are not just my imagination?
Can you offer a possible solution to this?
Are we just not that “real” as what we are thinking?
The philosopher and mathematician Rene Descartes has proposed his mechanical explanation of
the relationship between reality, mind, body, spirit and the soul.

PART 3 – Human Behavior and the Development of Society
Introduction
Anatomically modern humans, Homo sapiens sapiens possess anatomical, cognitive and
behavioral features that far more recent and virtually the same with us contemporary humans, as
compared to the extinct archaic humans like the Homo sapiens neanderthalis (Nitecki and
Nitecki, 1994). We Homo sapiens sapiens have our natural adaptations such as large well-
developed brain (see Figure 3.1), highly specialized limbs, lengthy biological development or
neoteny and complex cognitive, mental and psychological faculties leading to awareness of
oneself and environment, and social behavior (Cohen, 2017).
Figure 3.1 – Anatomy and size of the brain significantly varies across different species.
Human brain is one of the largest and well-developed brains in the animal kingdom. However, it
is noteworthy that the degree of development and differentiation of the parts of brain, thus the
complexities of neural networks (nerve connections) particularly the frontoparietal is attributed to
human intelligence (Colom, 2007). Nevertheless, the well-developed and organized anatomy of
the frontal and parietal lobe, larger amount of gray matter and the elaborate synapses connecting
neurons in our brain (Colom et al., 2010). Gray matter are parts of the brain containing most of
the cell bodies of neurons: more concentrated on the parts of brain involved in the functions such
as body senses, memory, emotion and muscle control and coordination (Miller et al., 1980).

Figure 3.2 - The relative position of the brain parts together with the structure of a typical neuron,
or nerve cell. The cell body of the neuron receives and facilitates the electrical impulses to be
transported away the cell body until reaching the synapses: either the electrical signal shall be
received by the dendrites of the cell body of other neurons so on so forth, terminating to the organ
involved in the neural process.
Also, humans have highly specialized limbs; the lower limbs for are used for transportation such
walking upright and trekking steep slopes like climbing, hence exhibiting habitual bipedalism.
Our two higher limbs though slightly weaker than the legs, are fit for grasping and fine-
manipulation of objects, thus our hands and arms are adapted for employing tools for work
(Henshilwood and Marean, 2003; Mcbrearty and Brooks, 2000; Korisettar, 1998). Another
observable adaption of human beings is the delayed body development and sexual maturity.
Starting from birth, it takes 9-15 years (Kail and Cavanaugh, 2010; Hamilton-Fairley, 2010) for a
human baby to enter sexual maturity, then even retaining juvenile characteristics into the adulthood
((Henshilwood and Marean, 2003; Mcbrearty and Brooks, 2000; Korisettar, 1998). This biological
phenomenon called neoteny has possibly enhanced human social interaction and communication
with each other in which many of our social behavior like extended parenting of young and
extension of familial ties (Henshilwood and Marean, 2003; Mcbrearty and Brooks, 2000;
Korisettar, 1998). Additionally, anthropologists postulated that due to physical appearance (see
Figure 4.3), of humans then are naturally inclined to be attracted and attached to each other, thus
the development of social interaction (Anderson-Fye, 2012).

Figure 3.3 – Aside from having a large, well developed brain, we modern humans have other
anatomical adaption (clockwise from left), a) physical appearance, b) lower limbs for bipedalism,
c) upper limbs for tool manipulation and d) neoteny.

Faculties of Human Understanding
Complex biochemical activities, neural and physiological processes lead to our ability of
perceiving external or internal information, in which we process and respond cognitively (mental
knowledge), affectively (mental emotions and values) and psychosomatically (mental movement
or function of the physical body). Many neurobiologist, biophysicists, psychologist and
psychiatrist believe that the product of these mental faculties is our awareness or consciousness.
However, the underlying exact mechanisms and principles how and why these leads to
consciousness is still unresolved today (McCabe et al., 2010; MacLean, 2016; Massey, 2002).
The aspects of human consciousness are, empirical observation or the ability to gather
information from sources using our body senses to hear, smell, see, feel and taste, self-awareness
which is the ability to look inwardly of oneself and relate to the outside, and sapience or the
capability to mentally process and arrive sound reasoning and judgment of information received
(DeCorse and Scupin, 2016; Massey, 2002; Kottak, 2010; Heyes, 2012). These leads to our ability
of understanding and therefore knowledge as the conglomerate of useful information in which
we mentally process, assimilate, and utilize regularly primarily for survival and other various use.
Figure 3.4 - Many neuroscientist, psychologist, biologist and biophysicist agree that
consciousness is an important mental process leading to human understanding of internal and
external information, but how this information is retained and assimilated as memory and thus as
knowledge is still poorly understood.
The human consciousness leads to our inherent behavior of curiosity or the natural inclination of
humans to detect, search, and explore objects, occurrences, and affairs of things, especially new
or obscure to the current understanding. Human curiosity is rooted to our mental faculty of
reasoning and cognition in we associate things with one another and clarify their relation and
purpose to arrive at a valid understanding and thus knowledge (Heyes, 2012). Some of the basic
human devices since the ancient times of observation, simulation and trial-and-error, have
helped our reasoning about finding relationship of things in nature and life. Most natural scientists
and social scientists today through the years have improved a methodological way of gathering
information and reasoning through experimentation.

Figure 3.5 - Some of the fundamental methods used by humans of data-gathering and problem-
solving are shown here. In Observation, here in the fresco painting by Giuseppe Bertini, Galileo
Galilei shows the Doge of Venice how to use the telescope. Galileo’s astronomical observation
using the telescope is unprecedented during his time. George Flegel’s still-life painting of fruits
with a pygmy parrot depicts faithful and realistic portrait of the real parrot and fruits, which is an
example showing human’s power of Simulation. The famous old saying “repeat until you succeed’
is a manifestation of human pursuit of the uncertain, in which we learn through trial-and-error.
The legendary Chinese official

Wan Hu, either real or fictitious
person during the Ming
dynasty, tries to propel himself
upward the sky using rockets
attached in his chair. Whether
the he knows or not the danger
of his experimentation is also
still legendary.

Behavioral modernity
We modern humans have exhibited capabilities not observed in archaic humans, which makes us
“modern” compared to them. Most paleoanthropologists and archeologists believe these traits of
modern humans have developed the language, complex emotions, cognition, and abstract thinking
are the foundation of our social interaction and the development of human knowledge. Here are
the following most common attributes describing behavioral modernity by humans:
A. Cognition. Our cognitive abilities of gathering information, processing through reasoning,

forming of concepts, ideas and memories, and arriving judgements and conclusion helps
us through formation of human knowledge. Social cognition described by psychologists
and sociologists as one of the advancements of our basic mental cognition, such that human
knowledge develops through the cognitive processes involved in our continuous social
interaction with each other human being (Heyes, 2012; North and Fiske, 2012; Fitch et al.,
2010; Massey, 2002).
B. Abstract thinking. Reasoning leads us to understand and determine the significance and
relationship of things with each other, including the meaning and representation of these
into concepts we mentally processed, communicated, and understand with others.
Symbolic representation of concepts and ideas, either literal or figuratively is universal in
arts and linguistics. Humans also have devised arbitrary symbols such as the alphabets to
represent the basic form of written communication. Semiotics, the study of linguistics and
non-linguistics signs and symbols including the assignment of meaning and processes
involved in the development of communication. According to theory of symbolic
interactionism, our ability to utilize symbolic communication leads to the formation of our
social interaction, basically understanding each other as humans understand the things of
humans (MacLean, 2016; Wurz, 2012; McCabe et al., 2010; Heyes, 2012; Massey, 2002)
(see Figure 4.6).
C. Language. Humans have developed elaborate and diverse ways of effective and habitual
communication using signs or symbols, either by gestures, speaking or writing. The
origin and mechanism of development of human language is still unknown due to lack of
archeological evidences dating back the prehistoric times (North and Fiske, 2012; Fitch et
al., 2010; Purves et al., 2001). However, majority of anthropologist, linguists and
semioticians generally accepted that humans acquired the ability of spoken language
between 100,000 – 400,000 BCE, from statistical analysis of phonemic diversity.
Semioticians have been comparing how these signs where used and evolved at different
contexts across different cultures: and to their amazement found significant pattern, such
as phonemic diversity. Phonemic diversity refers to distinctions and patterns of
consonants, vowels and tones we used on our current existing human languages.
D. Emotion. Humans have exhibited different forms of behavioral responses comprised of

complex mental processes directing our awareness and acceptance to ourselves and the
environment. Higher animals like dogs, squirrels and cats have shown comparable
emotional patterns with humans. Thereby, many neuroscientists and anthropologists
agreed that emotion is an innate function of the human consciousness, for higher chance of
survival and greater awareness of the surroundings (Massey, 2012).
E. Subsistence. Like other living organisms, we humans do regularly encounter challenges

of survival. Aside from our biological, psychological and behavioral adaptations, we have
developed a new type of adaptation in which we utilize and develop our awareness,
thinking, knowledge and response about ourselves and the surroundings. Evidences shown
that our human subsistence have been attributed to our cultural adaptation which is
dramatically more complex compared to other social animals. Study of artifacts from
archaeological evidences have shown the following general patterns and characteristics of

cultural adaptation (Wurz, 2012; North and Fiske, 2012; Giddens, 2006; Massey, 2002;
Avery, 2017; Bryant and Peck, 2007; Viergeyer, 1999):
 We humans rely on our environment for air, water, food, and other essential
resources to survive and live;
 The variableness of the conditions of our surroundings often drives us to adapt
and “fit” according to our local environment or otherwise;
 We are forced to find other place that will be more favorable to our continued
subsistence;
 We communicate and interact with our own kind through means or symbols we
generally are more likely to understand;
 We create and devised ways to help us ease the burden of work; and
 We have learned that decision-making, planning and “teaming” with others will
effectively execute much complex tasks and higher chance of survival; and
 We have learned to acquire, preserve and pass the understanding of these
individual and collective experiences to others and the future generations.
Figure 3.6 – Abstract thinking and symbolisms. (Upper left) Proto-Sinaitic script, considered as
one of the earliest known form of alphabets dating back 1800 BCE. From a stone artifact, the
inscriptions are deciphered to modern English as “mt l bʿlt "... to the Lady". (Lower Left) A Final
Jomon statuette (1000-400 BCE), Tokyo National Museum, Japan.
F. Cultural Adaptation. Cultural anthropologists and sociologists do have different theories

regarding the origins and development of human culture, the scarcity of artifacts from
prehistoric times and different perspectives, however do they agree that the human culture
is composed of all the human experiences, behaviors, knowledge, materials, and
interactions with each other and the environment (Avery, 2017; Massey, 2002; Viergeyer;
1999). Generally, human culture is characterized with the following:
 Religion – supernatural, morality, deity, mythology, and belief systems

 Technology – Structures, devices, items, industry, tools including the tool usages
like blades, pottery, clothing, boats, megalithic structures, dwelling places etc.
 Arts – Paintings, pottery, ornaments, music, dances etc.
 Rituals – religious, political, judicial, and academic activities
 Food and Cooking – Foraging, hunting, agriculture, horticulture, cuisine, etc.

 Settlement – sedentary or nomadic

 Knowledge – philosophy, humanities, foreknowledge, traditional knowledge,
skills and techniques, literacy, illiteracy etc.
G. Technocomplexes. Refers is the similarity of usage of items and technology made and
fashioned by humans across separate different group of peoples. These artifacts are of
special interest to archeologist, anthropologist, and sociologist (Viergeyer, 1999; Usher,
1988; Avery, 2017), because it provides direct evidences of the flourishing of human
knowledge and society (see Table 4.1 below).
Table 3.1. Technocomplexes includes many tools and equipment made by the people across
different cultures. Some of the most common is the boat, pottery, blade technology and megalithic
structures.
Boat
Upper left. 4000-year-old canoe boat excavated in a bog by Patrick Coen at Lurgan, Northern
Ireland. Upper right. Drawing of a Polynesian boat called catamaran, is used by Polynesians
and other Asians as early as 1500 BC. Lower left. An Inuit carrying his one-man boat, Kayak,
believed to have been invented at least 3500 years ago by the indigenous people at the subarctic
regions of East Asia, North America and Greenland. Lower right. Group of Aetas, rode native
long slender boat and maneuvered using bamboo outriggers.

Pottery
Pottery is considered one of the oldest technocomplexes of the human inventions. Pottery is
thought to have began during the Neolithic ages, 29000 years ago. Left. A pot from the Jowon
era of Japan (11000 to 8000 BCE). Displayed at the Tokyo National Museum, Japan. Right. One
of the well-known Greek potteries, a kater-shaped vase created by the famous Altamura painter,
between 470 and 460 BCE. Displayed at the Walters Art Museum, USA. Below. The Manunggul
Burial Jar excavated from Tabon Cave, Palawan, dating around 890 to 710 BCE.
Blade Technology: The Axe

Left. Drawing of hand axe dating back about at least 130000 years ago, excavated from Kent,
England. Middle. A bronze axe from the Shang dynasty of China (1600-1046 BCE). Right. A
stone axe used by the Aborigines inhabiting the south-eastern region of Australia.

Megalithic Structures
From the Greek word, megalith, meaning very large stones or rocks) are structures made up of
very large slabs or chunks of stones for as living space, monuments, religious gathering and burial
place. The stones are thought to be quarried from mountains or hills and transferred to sites where
fashioned, arranged without the use of mortar or concrete. Sometimes megalith is associated with
monolith meaning a large-than-life chunk of stones or rocks. Upper left. Gobekli Tepe megalith
complex in Southeastern Anatolia Region of Turkey, dated back around 9000 BCE is the most
ancient of all the megalithic structure discovered. Excavated artifacts like pillar and figurine of
astronomical and religious significance, have puzzled archeologists and anthropologists thinking
that the construction of the structures was apparently advanced at that time. Only 5% of the
complex was excavated, believed that the rest is still buried. Credits to Alastair Coombs. Upper
right. The Stonehenge in Wiltshire, England, dated back around 3000 to 2000 BCE, is considered
an astronomical observatory used by prehistoric people of Britain for determining seasons of the
year. Also bones were excavated at the site indicating it was also a burial place. Lower left. The
Moai monuments are made up of monoliths, fashioned to resemble human heads. They are made
by indigenous people Rapa Nui of Easter Island of Polynesia at the Pacific Ocean, around 1200
to 1500 CE. It is widely belief that humans have started inhabiting the islands in the Pacific Ocean
around 3000 BCE. Lower right. Megalithic cultures can be also found at the Southeast Asian
region. Here the native people of Nias Island in Indonesia are transporting a megalith. The
megaliths are erected for purposes like remember deceased member of the tribe and justice seat
of the tribal chieftain. Credit to Ludwig Borutta of Tropenmuseum.

Cultural Adaptation and the Social Behavior
In anthropological and sociological perspective, human culture exists and evolves due to complex
interaction of its elements acquired, processed, preserved and passed from generations to
generations. Regardless of cultural diversity or many multitudes of forms and customs observed
in different societies, humans have shared experiences, social interactions and communication
through a long and dramatic evolution of human knowledge and our intellect in which the
advancement of human society have laid its foundation. The advent of our “modern behavior” is
still unclear to many archeologists, anthropologists, and sociologists, but most of them agrees that
these capabilities also known as behavioral modernity thought to be strongly related with the
development of human social interaction, based on artifacts showing technocomplex and the
formation of culture, thus the formation of human society followed (Giddens and Griffiths, 2006;
Avery, 2017; Bryant and Peck, 2007; North and Fiske, 2012).
The complexity of the social structure, social patterns observable within a group of humans or
between the groups of humans can be traced on the development of human culture which includes
the basics of survival, adaptation, tool-making, ease of burden of work, and attainment of many
human activities through social interactions, planning, collaborations. As we humans realized our
contribution within our group or community, we realized that we occupy our position or status in
the social structure, with also differentiating our respective functions or role, leading to what will
be our identity in the society (Giddens and Griffiths, 2006; Avery, 2017; Bryant and Peck, 2007;
North and Fiske, 2012). Social role is divided into three categories, ascribed, achieved, and master
status. Ascribed social status refers to social attributes usually born with or even after at certain
circumstances gained unwillingly and has no prior control over its nature. Achieved status
meanwhile refers to the social role that can be attained through one’s own effort by hard work or
any endeavor and even through chance. Lastly, master status refers to the principal identity of a
person, mostly socially known for, meaning attributes that can greatly affects the reputation and
can last for life time (see Figure 4.8).
Figure 3.8 – The social role of an individual is influenced by different factors, some that cannot
be controlled by the person.

Figure 3.9 – Social behavior is rather intricate, and it creates the social framework of the society.
Civilization is even more complex society with more urbanity than simpler societies, thus
describing role of social cognition in the progress of human knowledge.

Formation of the Human Society
Human society have intellectually, culturally, and socially evolved, creating more complex and
highly differentiated social structure and order. Based on their subsistence economy, societies are
classified according to the economic development. As societies become more complex, urbanity
are established as more definite and permanent human settlement are made to support very large
population occupying that region where the source of sustenance is established very near the
settlement area, without the need to migrate from one place to another for search of valuable
resources (Massey, 2002; Avery, 2017; Wagner, 2008; Usher, 1988; Scupin and DeCorse, 2016;
Rundell, n.d.; Giddens and Griffiths, 2006): so for the members of the society to manage and
develop (agrarian and industries), capable of producing excess supply of those resources
(surplus production). The members of the society assume more definite role in the society
(specialization) leading to more elaborate social structure (social class and hierarchy), thus the
establishment of even definite social units or social institutions such as government, economy, and
education system (see Figure 4.9).
Also, another distinct characteristic of human society is our perceived separation of our built or
artificial environment in contrast to the natural environment where we get our resources to
support the society. Human civilization can exhibit these characteristics observable such as
1) Public works such as large-scale farms, buildings, infrastructures but not only limited to
that;
2) Writing system; and,
3) Development of human knowledge showing distinction of culture and leading to
disciplines of sciences and arts;
Domestication of plants and animals as source of daily sustenance of people have significantly
decreased our dependence in nomadic subsistence of hunting and foraging. In modern societies
today, hunting became a game activity, while foraging became obsolete due to our dependence on
manufactured goods and services, of course except the few existing tribes in Africa, America
and Asia who are still practicing it. The social structure became more differentiated and the roles
of the members in the community are more specialized.
Craftsmanship and Technology
A tool is anything that is used to assist and ease the burden of work. Tools can be utilized either
singly or in combination with other tools to form a simple machine to perform more complicated
activities. Combination of tools, simple machines and devices can form elaborate system complex
machines to support even more tedious and time-consuming human activities such agriculture
and industries. With our hands employing tools and machines, together with our collective
knowledge and experiences, we can form crafts and specialization, thus playing each of our roles
in the society. One of the most known crafts are the following:
o Tool-making o Pottery
o Metallurgy o Infrastructure
o Machineries o Farming
o Weaponry o Trading
o Weaving o Education

Figure 3.10 – The development of agrarian sector of the society. Upper left. Egyptian hieroglyphic
records of cattle domestication in ancient Egypt. Upper right. Semi-nomadic tribes have
exhibited pastoralism, grazing to fit their still hunter-gathering way of life. Lower left. A
horticulture student planting seedling in the pots. Lower right. An agricultural farm in China.
Figure 3.11 - Group of Aetas, rode native long slender boat and maneuvered using bamboo
outriggers (Upper left). The Stonehenge in Wiltshire, England, dated back around 3000 to 2000
BCE, is considered an astronomical observatory used by prehistoric people of Britain for
determining seasons of the year (Upper right). A wooden wheel and its axle of ancient cart
excavated and reconstructed, from France (Lower left). A keychain-sized miniature sculpture of a
tigress with her two cubs, dating from medieval Japan (Lower middle). A stone axe used by the
Aborigines inhabiting the south-eastern region of Australia (Lower right).

Permanent Human Settlement
Humans have learned to settle down for a more permanent residency since we have employed
domestication of plants and animals to support our daily sustenance, sedentism refers to our social
behavior residing in an area and forming social groups for a permanent settlement. Some of the
earliest human society have started to settle near river-plains and river-valleys. Humans have
pointed out the indispensability of water in daily living and as means of transportation.
Figure 3.12 – The three great river systems in the world: Nile River (green snake-shaped, lower
left) and Nile Delta (triangle, fan-shaped, upper left) in Egypt. The Tigris-Euphrates River system,
feeding the plains of Mesopotamia and Persia, current day covering expanses of Syria, Iran, and
Iraq in the Middle East. Indus River and the Indus River valley in India and Pakistan (left).

Figure 3.13 - Most of the earliest human civilizations have started near river and the nutrients-rich
river plains and delta. The Bronze age city of Mohenjo-Daro of the Indus River Valley Civilization
(Below, Upper left), Babylon City of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, between 626-539 BCE near
Euphrates River (Below, Lower right), and the New Kingdom of the Egyptian Empire near the
banks of Nile River, around 1600-1100 BCE.
According to sociocultural evolution theory, the rise, grandiose, and decline of human societies
is a manifestation of changes and dynamics of the main factors affecting the society, either having
positive or negative effects leading to modernity:
o Political-Economical (corruption, wars, alliances, geopolitical influences, world trade,

economic embargo, economic depression etc.)
o Natural Factors (climate, natural disasters, pestilences such as crops destruction by insects
and fungi, diseases, epidemics etc.)
o Human capital (low fertility rate, overpopulation, lifestyle, customs, values, literacy,
enculturation or adapting other culture, acculturation or blending of different cultures etc.)
o Intellect and Technology (religion, philosophy, sciences, humanities, discoveries,
inventions, innovations etc.)

Figure 3.14 - The development of Manila from colonial times up to the end of 20th century. Starting
from upper left clockwise: the account of Manila and surrounding areas in 1665; Escolta, Manila
during 1920; the aftermath of World War II left most of Manila destroyed; and Sta Cruz, Manila in
early 1990.

Table 3.2 – The progress of human societies and civilizations primarily depends on their survival
strategies, cultural adaptation, social interaction and collaboration (Massey, 2002).
Society
Hunting and Horticultural Postindustria

Agricultural Industrial
gathering and pastoral l
Beginning 200000 BCE Around 12000 Around 1700 CE 1960 CE

date to 10000 BCE 10000 to
5000 BCE
Sustenance Foraging Transition to Farming- Manufacturin Knowledge-

Hunting Plants and based g-based based
Animals
Domestication
Stone tools From stone Bronze and Steel and Silicon,

Tools and transition to iron other metallic plastic, and
perishables metal like alloys metal
like wood bronze
Culture and Traditional Traditional Religion Sciences, Sciences,

Knowledge knowledge, knowledge, and philosophy philosophy
religion and religion and philosophy, and religion and religion
mysticism mysticism transition to
exact
science
Settlement Camp From camps to City Metropolis Megalopolis
type village
Community 130-160 130-160 1 million 10 million 30 million

size

“The Origin of Human Languages”
It is a general knowledge that the cultures and societies have undergo dramatic changes since the
dawn of humanity. Human languages, either spoken, written or in any forms have been an
indispensable tool of communication and social interactions, with estimated 6500 languages
currently spoken today. It is however still an unsolved problem today what is the beginning and
diversification of human languages and speech. Semiotics and linguistics have been using
phonemic and phonetic analysis of languages to find diversity and patterns using the sounds being
spoken.
The Tower of Babel by Pieter Bruegel the

Elder. It portrays the Tower stated in the
Book of Genesis of the Bible regarding the
confusion and formation of different human
languages.
Using our own language Filipino and our native dialects, find some patterns in the sound and form
by asking you classmates to speak with their respective dialects, as asked and write it below:
WORDS Tagalog Ilocano Kapampangan Cebuano Bicolano

Human
Sun
House
Dog
Eat
In your own knowledge understanding, offer an explanation or hypothesis how did the human
languages developed and how did the language diversity have affected today’s human civilization.

PART 4 – Human Society as the Development of Science
Introduction
The foundations of social interaction leading to human knowledge and intellect is our ability of
communication through language, emotions, cognition, and abstract thinking. Besides from
physical, biological and psychological adaptation which led to our species survival and flourishing,
we have acquired new type of adaptation based on social interaction and behavioral modernity
called cultural adaptation Cultural adaptation is manifested through archeological artifacts such as
technology, tools, religion, arts, daily subsistence such as food and water, settlement and rituals.
Technocomplex is the similarity on type of technology of human artifacts made across separate
different group of peoples, providing direct evidences of the flourishing of human knowledge and
society. Regardless of cultural differences resulting to cultural diversity, it is a general principle
and understanding in anthropology and sociology that humans have generally shared these
universals specially of basic needs and commodities, mental and cognition, communal
experiences, social interactions and communication. These similarities have driven the long and
dramatic evolution of human knowledge and our intellect in which the advancement of human
society is based (Wagner, 2008; Kuhn, 1970). We have learned from the past lessons that different
societies and cultures started around the world also share a common patterns and attributes in terms
of the following main cultural universals (Keith, 2005; Scupin and DeCorse, 2016):
1) Language
2) Mental and cognitive faculties
3) Social interaction
4) Knowledge
5) Technology
6) Values, Customs and traditions
7) Spatial (geographic locations and climate variation) and temporal (time-element)
dimensions of the society
The way and manner we developed these ideas and concepts based on our reasoning and perception
on the reality started around us is called paradigm. Paradigms is pervasive in the evolution of
human endeavors like sciences and humanities that it is also changing or adapting to meet the
needs of the advancement of human knowledge. Paradigm shifts then leads to revolutionary
changes in human knowledge and to human culture and society, which we see the effects as
innovations and breakthroughs (Kuhn, 1970). Philosophically and historically, sciences have
evolved through continuous shift in its own paradigms. Modern science is a well-defined
organization of human knowledge through a systematic and methodological inquiry called
scientific method (see Figure 5.1).
Social Knowledge
KNOWLEDGE/
INNOVATION
Intellectual Knowledge Paradigm  Scientific
Shifts Breakthroughs
 Cultural and Social
Sensory Knowledge Changes
Figure 4.1 – Paradigm shifts of knowledge are guided not only by intellectual and sensory
knowledge but also by the stakeholders in the process: and these lead to some of the greatest
discoveries and breakthroughs that revolutionize the society (Kuhn, 1970).

Understanding the Progress of Science in Historical Context
The complexity of social interactions and culture have evolved due time which also caused the
social role of each member in a community to evolve, leading to the formation of human society.
Regardless of cultural diversity and environmental differences, different human cultures have
shared a common pattern and similarity in terms of development of human knowledge and its
effect on the advancement of the human society. The development of society in to more complex
system is fueled by innovations in human subsistence, culture, knowledge, technology,
craftsmanship, and permanent human settlement. Complex societies have types such as the
hunting-and-gathering society, horticultural-pastoral society, agricultural society, industrial
society and the most recent and modern is the postindustrial society. Throughout the history of
humanity, the most important breakthroughs and most notable paradigm shifts in knowledge
leading to revolution to sciences, innovation and improvement of human life (Mansour, 2009;
Longino, 2016). To understand the progress of society, historical relevance of science can never
be underestimated. STSE will delved on the chronological and narrative background of the
development of society and human knowledge leading to advancement of science and technology
which can give us a light on how the progress of human civilization and its influences have
contributed to its change (Pedretti, 2005; Aikenhead, 2003).
The First Agricultural Revolution, also called the Neolithic Revolution, is the major turning
point of many human cultures, from having a nomadic lifestyle of hunting-gathering to
permanently settled societies. It was believed to have taken place around 13000 BCE, where
separated human settlements at different locations around the world humans have learned
determine plants which are edible and palatable, even those with medicinal properties (Barker,
2006); also, humans have learned to domesticate and breed animals (such as dog, ruminants like
sheep, oxen, and goat, and camel).
Figure 4.2. From upper left, clockwise. Rice (Oryza sativa), common Wheat (Triticum aestivum),
Potato (Solanum tuberosum), and Maize or corn, Zea mays,are the four major staple food of
humans. A staple food is a food recurrently eaten, consisting the largest serving of an average diet
of a group of people.

Figure 4.3. Technocomplexes in agriculture. Plough and hoe are one of the earliest tools used for
agricultural activities in the earliest civilization, and it usefulness have outlived the ancient times
up to the modern times.
Plough and hoe are the two of indispensable tools in cultivation of plants. With these simple
machines, together with a “beast of burden” like a cattle, donkey or buffalo, large swaths of land
can be easily tilled and planted with seeds or seedlings (See Figure 4.3). Dog (Canis lupus
familiaris) was first domesticated at the hunter-gatherer societies, started at least 15000 BCE
originated together with its closest relative wolf species of the extant Grey wolf, Canis lupus
(Irving-Pease et al., 2018). Dogs have developed strong bond to humans which is observably
manifested by these known behaviors like affection, loyalty, and accustomed to humans’ diet.
Animals are domesticated primarily as source of meat, clothing, pets, guards, companion and
assistant in hunting, herding, and transportation. Here are some of the most important domesticated
animals (see Figure 4.4), which were thought to be first domesticated around 13500-12500 BCE
(Serpell and Barrett, 2017). Humans have acquired knowledge and skills necessary, thus to
understanding the physical features, behavior, life cycle and reproduction of animals, which shall
be very useful, not only as source of food, but also for the reasons such as aid to perform work,
companion, entertainment, objects of religious or aesthetic significance. Today’s domesticated
animals were thought to be genetically originated from wild species (Larson and Fuller, 2014;
Zeder, 2012).
Through experience, systematic observation, investigation and experiments done by humans

during those times, have led to domestication and breeding of plants and animals, using the
acquired knowledge of the biological attributes of these living organisms such as morpho-
anatomical features, growth rate, and reproduction mode. Also, dating methods were performed
especially using radioactive element isotopes contained in the plant and animal remains found at
archaeological excavations of ancient human settlements; it was found out that the first agricultural
activities by humans where located at the sites where earliest human civilizations have appeared
known as the cradles of the civilization (Barker, 2006; Ladizinsky, 1998).

Figure 4.4. Some of the earliest domesticated animals. A Stone Age cave painting of a wolf, in a
cave in France (uppermost left), and ancient Greeks are accompanied by dogs in their hunting:
painted in an old kater-shaped pot (uppermost right). The images from 2nd row to 4th row, are also
some of the earliest animals that were domesticated. Can you tell the common name and scientific
name of them?

Metallurgy is the ancient arts and science of extracting, and manipulating metals and its mixtures,
called alloy, producing tools made from it. Also called metals of antiquity, the following are the
earliest metals used by humans since prehistoric times:
 Copper  Lead  Mercury  Tin

 Gold  Arsenic  Silver  Iron
Figure 4.5. Metallurgy. (Upper left) Smelting gold ores at to thousands of degrees temperature to
extract pure gold, which is then molded (casting) to make a gold ingot, 99.5% pure gold. Copper-
made pin ornament found in Eastern Europe, Chalcolithic period or Copper age, circa 5000 BCE
(Upper right up). During the Bronze age (4000BCE), humans have employed combination
mixtures of metals called alloys which bronze is the most well-known and precious metals like
silver and gold, have been used for ornament and trading values (Upper right down). Sphinx-lion
bronze statue of Egyptian Pharaoh Thutmose III around 1480-1420 BCE, (Lower left). The iron
pillar from Qutb complex in Delhi, India, exhibiting iron’s very high resistance against oxidation,
which was quite advance during their time, around 3th to 4th CE (Lower right).

The start of human civilization was thought to have commence when people have learned
agriculture, pottery, metallurgy, architecture and permanent settlement (sedentism). These
so-called birthplace or cradles of civilization are the six places around the world, generally
accepted where human civilizations have developed (see Table 5.1).
Figure 4.6. Cradles of Civilization, denoting the locations of earliest human socities.
The six known cradles of civilization refer to the locations around the world where human societies
are established and progressed separately (see Figure 5.6). These are the locations, three (3) places
in Asia namely: Mesopotamia civilization in the Euphrates-Tigris river region of the Middle-East
Asia, Indus Valley civilization in Indian subcontinent, and North China civilization in mainland
China; one (1) in Africa which is the Ancient Egypt civilization in Egypt, northeast Africa; and
two (2) in the American continents, Mesoamerica civilization in Central America, and Ancient
Andes civilization in the Andean regions of South America. Take note that Mesopotamia together
with Egyptian Nile regions, Mediterranean costal region of Middle-East Asia (current Israel,
Lebanon, Syria and Jordan), and Anatolia peninsula (current-day Turkey) comprise what we called
as the Fertile Crescent.

Table 4.1. The progress of human civilization with its historical breakthroughs and contribution
to humankind.
Mesopotamia and Middle East societies - Invention of Agriculture and Irrigation

Civilization originated near the banks of Tigris- - Invention of Wheel
Euphrates River in the Middle East, started - Use of metal-made tools, metallurgy
around 12000-10000 BCE - Development of religion; rise of the three
great Abrahamic religion, Judaism,
Christianity, and Islam
- Engineering and architectural marvels such
as the ziggurat temple-palace, monuments,
temples, palace, paved roads, artificial water
channels and fortified walls
- Developed a form of city planning and
urbanity
- Astronomical observation of stars and
planets, mapping constellations and
astrology, prior to Astronomy
- Time-keeping such as using of sundial
clocks and 12-month based calendar
- Cuneiform, one of the earliest writing
systems with clay and stone tablets and
stylus as means of writing. Developed and
improved the writing system, the use of
letters which is the root of the modern
Cuneiform writing in a clay tablet alphabet scripts, from Phoenician
alphabets.
- Development of Mathematics, such as
algebra, geometry, trigonometry, and
calculus. Counting system such as the
development of Arabic numerals (0, 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) based on the refinement of
the original Indian numerals forming the
Hindu-Arabic decimal system which we
use today.
- Development of medicine, alchemy prior to
chemistry

Reconstruction of the Ziggurat at the ancient

Sumerian city of Ur. Sumer is considered some
of the earliest complex societies in the world.
Sargon of Akkad have subdued and merged with
Sumer to form the first empire, Akkadian
Empire (also called Sumerian-Akkadian) about
22nd century BCE.
One of the oldest religion is the Judaism which

were founded by Moses and thoroughly
established through by the people of Israel. The
Mosaic law has been given by Moses and written
in the Torah (Pentateuch) which is known today
as the first five books of the Christian Bible.
Jews today still observed traditions and rituals
written in the Mosaic laws as part of their Jewish
culture.
In the modern times, Mosaic law has been

referenced as one of the earliest written laws,
inspiring many constitutions and legislative
institutions of different countries like in the
United States of America.
Dead Sea Scrolls – “Damascus scroll fragment”.

The Dead Sea scrolls are ancient manuscripts of
almost all the written books of the Hebrew Bible
(the Old Testament of the Christian Bible). Dead
Sea scrolls are made up of animal skins, and were
sealed in earthen jars buried in the Qumran caves
near the coasts of Dead Sea at Jordan. One of the
distinct characteristics of Jewish culture is writing
records and chronologies which many of them are
still surviving today.

The model of Herod’s Temple. The Second

Temple also called Herod’s Temple, in
Jerusalem, constructed around 516 BCE and
destroyed by then Roman general, Emperor Titus
on the Siege of Jerusalem on 70 CE. The First
Temple, which was built by King Solomon, was
destroyed around 587-586 BC by
Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Neo-Babylonian
empire, together with the capture and exile of
most Jews from Canaan to Babylon.
Highlighting the one of the most important part of

Jewish history, Second Temple Period, many
events have taken place like the birth and life of
Jesus Christ of Nazareth, in ancient Galilee.
Jesus is the founder of the religion Christianism.
Jesus was born around 6-4 BC in Israel and died

around 30-35 AD. Almost all scholars,
corroborated by ancient historical evidences and
modern archeological evidences, agreed the
existence of Jesus. Jesus is a Jewish teacher, and
his teachings has a very profound influence in the
Jewish, Islamic, and Christian cultures. Followers
of Jesus, his apostles and disciples and their
diaspora around the known world during that time
has been a key in the spread of Christianism up to
the modern times.
A 17th century painting about Apostle Paul.

Teachings of Christ, his apostles and disciples
were manually written by them and preserved up
until the modern times.
Martin Luther’s translation of the Bible. Ancient

Hebrew and Greek manuscripts were preserved
and translated since antiquity until the modern
times. Now, the New Testament as commonly
called today, which contains the teachings of
Jesus Christ and early Christians of the 1st century
AD, together with the Old Testament as also
called, forms the Christian Bible.

Islam religion were founded by Muhammad the

prophet through receiving revelation via angel
Gabriel, around 610 CE. The
The Golden Age of Islam (800- 1400 CE)
highlighted the advancement of philosophy,
natural sciences, mathematics, astronomy,
medicine, trade and through flourishing of
cultural works as established by mass gathering
and translation of all the knowledge existing that
time by Muslim scholars, and preservation
through the Islamic libraries, academies, and
government-funded scholarships.
The Tanakh (Hebrew Bible)
The three (3) main Abrahamic religion: Judaism,

Christianism, and Islam were then from antiquity
has existed and spread to almost all countries up
today, are established as world religions,
influencing the human civilization for millennia.
The Gutenberg Bible, the first press-produced

Christian Bible
The first sura of the Quran.

Egypt and African societies
Civilization originated near the banks of Nile River and fertile plains of Nile Delta in Africa,
started around, 11000-10000 BCE
- Invention of agriculture, dams and irrigation channels to water farms

- Writing system hieroglyphs use of papyrus plant to create papyrus paper, and creation of ink
- Development of Mathematics particularly geometry of rectangles and rectilinear curves
applied in architecture
- Engineering and architectural marvels such as the Pyramids, monuments, temples, palace,
paved roads, artificial water channels and fortified walls
- Use of metal-made tools, metallurgy
- Lotions, creams, balms, cosmetics and cosmetology
- Development in medicine, like surgery
- Development of calendar
The Papyrus plant (Cyperus papyrus). Papyrus paper scroll. Written in the papyrus is an excerpt on
the Egyptian Book of the Dead.

Aerial shot of the Great Pyramids of Giza
A metal hand cross from Solomon Dynasty of ancient Ethiopian society, used in religious ritual
procession (Left). Kebra Nagast, created 14th century CE, showing the account of Solomon Dynasty
of Ethiopia (Right).

India and South Asia societies

Civilization originated near the banks of Indus River, started around 7600 BCE
- Invention of agriculture
- Use of metal-made tools, metallurgy particularly the discovery of highly rust-resistant iron
metallurgy.
- Development of the two-great world religion, Hinduism and Buddhism
- Development of Hindu-Arabic decimal system which we use today.
- Engineering and architectural marvels such as the buildings, monuments, temples, paved roads,
artificial water channels
- Developed a form of city planning and urbanity
Pashupati seal (left) is one of the earliest record regarding Shiva, the Hindu god creator and destroyer
of all, and gods of animals. Here a figure with apparently three heads is surrounded by different
animals. The ruins of ancient city Mohenjo-Daro (right) of Indus civilization which is also called
Harappan civilization.
China and East Asia

Civilization originated near the banks of Huang He or Yellow River of Northern China, started
around 7000 BCE
- Invention of agriculture
- Development of writing system calligraphy
- Paper-making and printing technology
- Gun-powder and fireworks
- Silk harvesting from silk worms
- Astronomical observation of stars and planets, mapping constellations and astrology, prior to
Astronomy, and development of lunar calendar
- Engineering and architectural marvels such as the monuments, temples, palace, paved roads,
artificial water channels and fortified walls like the Great Wall of China
- Advancement in pottery like porcelain
- Invention of compass
- Gave birth to world philosophy of Confucianism, Taoism, and other oriental religion

The Great Wall of China
Central Andes and the South Americas

Central Andes Mountain region in South America, started around 5000 BCE
- Invention of agriculture. The Inca civilization have

cultivated potatoes
- Engineering and architectural marvels such as the paved
roads and suspension bridges, monuments, temples,
palace, land terraces to support farming and fortified
walls of great strength and quality which reflected quite
elaborate urban design and urban planning like the
Manchu Pichu
- Incas also mapped the constellations and prior to
Astronomy, and developed of a calendar for farming
season, religious and civil activities
- Created clothing made up of cotton and llama’s fur
- Well planned centralized economy and social-safety nets
by establishing food storage facilities
- Developed quite elaborate recording and accounting
system using knotted threads called quipu (right), which
the numerical pattern is based on tens (10s) just like our
modern number systems and thought to be a form of proto-
writing in ancient America.

Manchu Pichu of the Inca civilization is sitting atop the mountains, where the Temple of the Sun is
also located.
Mesoamerica and Central American societies

In Central America started around 5000 to 3400 BCE
- Invention of agriculture. The Maya civilization cultivated maize or corn

- Engineering and architectural marvels such as the pyramids monuments, temples, palace,
paved roads, and fortified walls of great strength and quality which reflected quite elaborate
urban design and urban planning
- Mayans also have complex numerical system and developed 365-days based calendar
- Mayans have performed astronomical observations, mapped the constellations, and able to
predict solar eclipses
- Mayans together with Aztec were first to be known to use rubber balls
- Invention of agriculture. The Aztec civilization have cultivated cacao, the source of
chocolate. Aztecs have developed technological innovation in farming called chinampa where
farm lands are divided rectangularly with a water canal surrounding
- Aztecs also mapped the constellations and prior to Astronomy, and developed of a calendar
for farming season, religious and civil activities
- Aztecs have developed quite comprehensive plan which obliged all the children to study and
learn, one of the earliest forms of universal education

American Indians inhabiting the ruins of ancient Mesoamerican civilizations, on medieval times
(upper). Extensive Mayan architectural creations such as pyramids and buildings with elaborate city
planning designs. Mayan Pyramid of Temple Kukulcan in Yucatan, Mexico (middle). Aztec Pyramid
in St. Cecilia Acatitlan, Mexico (lower)

“Why Societies Decline and Collapse?”
Ancient Mayan temple in Mexico
Ruins of ancient Roman city of Pompeii with Mt. Vesuvius on the background.
The Mayan society and the Pompeii’s society have collapsed hundreds of years ago. Unlike the
slow fall and disintegration of Indus Valley society, Maya’s collapse has taken for less than a 200
years and Pompeii’s collapse takes place less than a month. With the idea that the Maya and Indus
valley with other cradles of civilization, have been the centers of their respective urban
development, economy, technological and scientific progress, how come still they have declined
and collapsed? Is it inevitable or avoidable? Or they have just evolved or succeeded by more
advanced societies? Also, do you think that the whole human civilization will collapse or stay for
eternity? Explain and give us your own hypothesis!

IMAGE/PHOTO SOURCES
Part 1 – Understanding Science and its Limitations
1) Blind men and an Elephant. 1914. Martha Adelaide Holton & Charles Madison
Curry, Holton-Curry readers, Rand McNally & Co. (Chicago), p. 108.
2) File:Little Gasparilla sunrise.jpg. (2018, October 7). Wikimedia Commons, the free
media repository. Retrieved 11:58, April 23, 2019 from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Little_Gasparilla_sunrise.jpg&
oldid=323216283.
3) File:Hiroshima aftermath.jpg. (2016, September 8). Wikimedia Commons, the free
media repository. Retrieved 03:45, April 24, 2019 from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Hiroshima_aftermath.jpg&oldi
d=206079379.
4) File:Nagasakibomb.jpg. (2018, July 29). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
repository. Retrieved 03:54, April 24, 2019 from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Nagasakibomb.jpg&oldid=312
813854.
Part 2 – Science as a System of Knowledge
1) File:Sanzio 01 Plato Aristotle.jpg. (2018, February 3). Wikimedia Commons, the free
media repository. Retrieved 13:13, September 3, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Sanzio_01_Plato_Aristot
le.jpg&oldid=285134865.
2) File:Frans Hals - Portret van René Descartes.jpg. (2018, June 4). Wikimedia
Commons, the free media repository. Retrieved 13:07, September 3, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Frans_Hals_-
_Portret_van_Ren%C3%A9_Descartes.jpg&oldid=304543173.
3) Thomas Kuhn portrait by Davi.trip. CC-BY-A-SA-4.0. File:Thomas-kuhn-
portrait.png. (2018, February 24). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository.
Retrieved 13:27, September 3, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Thomas-kuhn-
portrait.png&oldid=288939756.
4) File:Kant gemaelde 3.jpg. (2018, January 29). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
repository. Retrieved 13:35, September 3, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Kant_gemaelde_3.jpg&o
ldid=283874046.
5) File:Charles Sanders Peirce.jpg. (2012, December 17). Wikimedia Commons, the free
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Charles_Sanders_Peirce.j
pg&oldid=85165277.
6) File:Nietzsche1882.jpg. (2018, June 7). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Nietzsche1882.jpg&oldid
=305095711.
7) Apple. https://www.wpclipart.com/food/fruit/apple/apple_2.png.html
8) File:95apple.jpeg. (2018, August 28). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository.
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:95apple.jpeg&oldid=317
147260.
9) Apple pie. Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash
10) Apple fruit being picked from the apple tree. Photo by Georgia de Lotz on Unsplash
11) File:1660 engraving Scenographia Systematis Copernicani.jpg. (2018, July
28). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository. Retrieved 03:27, September 5,
2018

from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:1660_engraving_Scenogr
aphia_Systematis_Copernicani.jpg&oldid=312657722.
12) File:Paul Feyerabend 2.jpg. (2015, October 3). Author: Grazia Borrini-Feyerabend.
Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository. Retrieved 18:23, April 24, 2019 from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Paul_Feyerabend_2.jpg&oldid
=174303195.
Part 3 – Human Behavior and the Development of Society
1) File:Human Body.jpg. (2018, September 3). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
repository. Retrieved 23:04, April 24, 2019 from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Human_Body.jpg&oldid=318
404608.
2) File:Native Encampment by Skinner Prout, from Australia (1876, vol II).jpg. (2018,
February 7). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository. Retrieved 07:06,
September 7, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Native_Encampment_by
_Skinner_Prout,_from_Australia_(1876,_vol_II).jpg&oldid=285646079.
3) File:Sameul Daniell - Kora-Khokhoi preparing to move - 1805.jpg. (2018, May
2018 from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Sameul_Daniell_-
_Kora-Khokhoi_preparing_to_move_-_1805.jpg&oldid=301476557.
4) File:Egyptian Domesticated Animals.jpg. (2018, May 10). Wikimedia Commons, the
free media repository. Retrieved 07:11, September 7, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Egyptian_Domesticated_
Animals.jpg&oldid=300423862.
5) File:Farm in Hainan 01.jpg. (2018, February 1). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
repository. Retrieved 07:50, September 10, 2018 from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Farm_in_Hainan_01.jpg&oldi
d=284500180.
6) File:Miyasaka Hakuryu II - Tigress with Two Cubs - Walters 71909.jpg. (2017,
December 23). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository. Retrieved 07:38,
September 10, 2018 from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Miyasaka_Hakuryu_II_-
_Tigress_with_Two_Cubs_-_Walters_71909.jpg&oldid=273929799.
7) Manunggul Burial Jar. https://myelitedetail.us/clipart/jar-clipart-banga_1813679.html
8) File:Moai Rano raraku.jpg. (2018, February 17). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
9) File:Native tribes of South-East Australia Fig 14 - Stone axe.jpg. (2015, January
2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Native_tribes_of_South-
East_Australia_Fig_14_-_Stone_axe.jpg&oldid=147108875.
10) File:Stonehenge.arp.jpg. (2014, August 19). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Stonehenge.arp.jpg&oldi
d=131978628.
11) File:Nile River and delta from orbit.jpg. (2018, July 28). Wikimedia Commons, the
free media repository. Retrieved 08:45, September 10, 2018 from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Nile_River_and_delta_from_o
rbit.jpg&oldid=312659589.
12) File:EgyptFrontispiece.jpg. (2015, May 12). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
repository. Retrieved 08:55, September 10, 2018 from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:EgyptFrontispiece.jpg&oldid=
160462818.

13) File:Indus.A2002274.0610.1km.jpg. (2017, March 26). Wikimedia Commons, the free

media repository. Retrieved 00:15, September 19, 2018 from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Indus.A2002274.0610.1km.jpg
&oldid=238653481.
14) File:Mohenjodaro Sindh.jpeg. (2018, June 7). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Mohenjodaro_Sindh.jpeg
&oldid=305115322.
15) File:Manila Province.jpg. (2018, February 14). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Manila_Province.jpg&ol
did=287076759.
16) File:Naturales 5.png. (2016, September 23). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Naturales_5.png&oldid=
207523124.
17) File:Manila Walled City Destruction May 1945.jpg. (2014, July 16). Wikimedia
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Manila_Walled_City_De
struction_May_1945.jpg&oldid=129082718.
18) File:AMH-6763-NA Bird's eye view of Manila.jpg. (2015, December 22). Wikimedia
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:AMH-6763-
NA_Bird%27s_eye_view_of_Manila.jpg&oldid=182600041.
19) File:Avenida in Rizal, Manila in the mid 90's.jpg. (2017, January 10). Wikimedia
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Avenida_in_Rizal,_Mani
la_in_the_mid_90%27s.jpg&oldid=229253426.
20) File:119th Rizal Day commemoration.jpg. (2017, October 4). Wikimedia Commons,
the free media repository. Retrieved 02:41, September 19, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:119th_Rizal_Day_comm
emoration.jpg&oldid=261534834.
21) Photo by George Hodan. https://www.publicdomainpictures.net
22) https://www.wpclipart.com/sign_language/American_ABC_Photos/American_Alphab
et_picture.png.html
23) Faces with different emotions. Photo by Gratis Photography. Photo via <a
href="https://www.goodfreephotos.com/">Good Free Photos</a>
24) Budapest city Statue of women thinking in Hungary. Photo by The Photographer.
Photo via <a href="https://www.goodfreephotos.com/">Good Free Photos</a>
25) File:Ba`alat.png. (2017, December 2). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
repository. Retrieved 20:27, August 29, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Ba%60alat.png&oldid=2
70359714.
26) File:JomonStatue.JPG. (2018, August 15). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
repository. Retrieved 19:52, August 29, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:JomonStatue.JPG&oldid
=314832607.
27) Becker, Bob. A Seminole dug-out in use. 193-. Black & white photonegative, 5 x 4 in.
State Archives of Florida, Florida Memory.
<https://www.floridamemory.com/items/show/164606>, accessed 31 August 2018.
28) Cribbin, G., Robinson, M. E. & Shimwell, D. W. 1999 ‘Re-asssessing the logboat
from Lurgan townland, Co. Galway, Ireland’ in Antiquity, Vo. 73, No. 282, pp. 903-
908
29) File:Priests traveling across kealakekua bay for first contact rituals.jpg. (2018, January
28). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository. Retrieved 16:44, August 31,
2018

from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Priests_traveling_across_
kealakekua_bay_for_first_contact_rituals.jpg&oldid=283425035.
30) File:Captain Edward Augustus Inglefield - National Maritime Museum - Inuit man
with a kayak (pd)-Edit1.jpg. (2017, December 10). Wikimedia Commons, the free
media repository. Retrieved 16:51, August 31, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Captain_Edward_August
us_Inglefield_-_National_Maritime_Museum_-_Inuit_man_with_a_kayak_(pd)-
Edit1.jpg&oldid=271302165.
31) File:Biface (trihedral) Amar Merdeg, Mehran, Ilam, Lower Paleolithic, National
Museum of Iran.jpg. (2018, March 31). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Biface_(trihedral)_Amar
_Merdeg,_Mehran,_Ilam,_Lower_Paleolithic,_National_Museum_of_Iran.jpg&oldid=
294678429.
32) Bronze axe from the Shang Dynasty [Digital image]. (n.d.). Retrieved September 4,
2018, from https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/49404
33) File:Native tribes of South-East Australia Fig 14 - Stone axe.jpg. (2015, January
2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Native_tribes_of_South-
East_Australia_Fig_14_-_Stone_axe.jpg&oldid=147108875.
34) Gobekli Tepe. Photo by Alistair Coombs. https://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-
places-asia/g-bekli-tepe-great-year-001667
35) File:Stonehenge.arp.jpg. (2014, August 19). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Stonehenge.arp.jpg&oldi
d=131978628.
36) People on Nias Island in Indonesia move a megalith, c. 1915. Digitally restored
image by Tropenmuseum, part of the National Museum of World Cultures. License
under CC BY-SA 3.0.
37) File:COLLECTIE TROPENMUSEUM 'Het verslepen van de steen 'Darodaro' voor de
gestorven Saoenigeho van Bawamataloea Nias TMnr 1000095b.jpg. (2015, March
2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:COLLECTIE_TROPEN
MUSEUM_%27Het_verslepen_van_de_steen_%27Darodaro%27_voor_de_gestorven
_Saoenigeho_van_Bawamataloea_Nias_TMnr_1000095b.jpg&oldid=152406760.
38) File:Moai Rano raraku.jpg. (2018, February 17). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Moai_Rano_raraku.jpg&
oldid=287769937.
39) File:JomonPottery.JPG. (2017, May 5). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:JomonPottery.JPG&oldid
=242984181.
40) File:Altamura Painter - Red-Figure Calyx Krater - Walters 48262 - Side A.jpg. (2014,
April 19). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository. Retrieved 05:38,
September 3, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Altamura_Painter_-
_Red-Figure_Calyx_Krater_-_Walters_48262_-_Side_A.jpg&oldid=121698392.
41) Manunggul Burial Jar. https://myelitedetail.us/clipart/jar-clipart-banga_1813679.html
42) File:Pieter Bruegel the Elder - The Tower of Babel (Vienna) - Google Art Project.jpg.
(2013, February 3). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository. Retrieved 02:31,
September 7, 2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elde
r_-_The_Tower_of_Babel_(Vienna)_Google_Art_Project.jpg&oldid=89685087.

Part 4 – Human Society as the Development of Science
1) File:Aaron Burden 2015-10-21 (Unsplash njTzygd3iMw).jpg. (2018, March

2018
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Aaron_Burden_2015-10-
21_(Unsplash_njTzygd3iMw).jpg&oldid=291705505.
2) File:Wheat harvest.jpg. (2016, April 10). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Wheat_harvest.jpg&oldi
d=192788176.
3) File:Banaue-terrace.JPG. (2015, October 13). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Banaue-
terrace.JPG&oldid=175553251.
4) File:Patates.jpg. (2014, April 29). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository.
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Patates.jpg&oldid=12255
4641.
5) File:Maler der Grabkammer des Sennudem 001.jpg. (2018, March 7). Wikimedia
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Maler_der_Grabkammer
_des_Sennudem_001.jpg&oldid=291217910.
6) Garden hoe. https://www.wpclipart.com/tools/lawn_garden/hoe/garden_hoe.png.html
7) File:Roue primitive.png. (2017, April 14). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Roue_primitive.png&old
id=240807347.
8) File:Men of the old stone age (1915) Wolf.png. (2018, May 10). Wikimedia Commons,
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Men_of_the_old_stone_a
ge_(1915)_Wolf.png&oldid=300469766.
9) File:Boar Hunting.jpg. (2017, January 6). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Boar_Hunting.jpg&oldid
=228872850.
10) File:Hereford bull large.jpg. (2018, April 26). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Hereford_bull_large.jpg
&oldid=298600251.
11) File:Angora 001.jpg. (2013, October 20). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Angora_001.jpg&oldid=
107535421.
12) File:Sow with piglet.jpg. (2016, March 7). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Sow_with_piglet.jpg&ol
did=189664652.
13) File:FEMA - 34984 - Humane Society worker holding rescued cats.jpg. (2018, June
2018 from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:FEMA_-_34984_-
_Humane_Society_worker_holding_rescued_cats.jpg&oldid=305356509.
14) File:Donkey 1 arp 750px.jpg. (2017, March 20). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Donkey_1_arp_750px.jp
g&oldid=237875833.

15) File:Red junglefowl hm.jpg. (2015, November 30). Wikimedia Commons, the free
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Red_junglefowl_hm.jpg
&oldid=180679425.
16) File:Carabao Cart.jpg. (2015, June 1). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository.
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Carabao_Cart.jpg&oldid
=162348737.
17) File:Dromadaire4478.jpg. (2015, November 5). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Dromadaire4478.jpg&ol
did=178108619.
18) File:Kew.gardens.papyrus.plant.arp.jpg. (2018, January 20). Wikimedia Commons, the
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Kew.gardens.papyrus.pla
nt.arp.jpg&oldid=281381628.
19) File:Sumerian 26th c Adab.jpg. (2016, March 16). Wikimedia Commons, the free
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Sumerian_26th_c_Adab.j
pg&oldid=190478487.
20) File:Ziggurat of ur.jpg. (2017, December 4). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Ziggurat_of_ur.jpg&oldi
d=270609730.
21) File:Guido Reni - Moses with the Tables of the Law - WGA19289.jpg. (2019, August
1). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository. Retrieved 14:55, January 3, 2021
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Guido_Reni_-
_Moses_with_the_Tables_of_the_Law_-_WGA19289.jpg&oldid=360192751.
22) File:Paolo Veronese 010.jpg. (2020, April 24). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
repository. Retrieved 14:59, January 3, 2021
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Paolo_Veronese_010.jpg
&oldid=414614213.
23) File:The Damascus Document Scroll.jpg. (2020, September 30). Wikimedia Commons,
the free media repository. Retrieved 15:15, January 3, 2021
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:The_Damascus_Docume
nt_Scroll.jpg&oldid=476123303.
24) File:Probably Valentin de Boulogne - Saint Paul Writing His Epistles - Google Art
Project.jpg. (2020, January 26). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository.
Retrieved 14:58, January 3, 2021
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Probably_Valentin_de_B
oulogne_-_Saint_Paul_Writing_His_Epistles_-
_Google_Art_Project.jpg&oldid=390124259.
25) File:Lutherbibel.jpg. (2020, October 15). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
repository. Retrieved 15:07, January 3, 2021
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Lutherbibel.jpg&oldid=4
90729778.
26) File:Entire Tanakh scroll set.png. (2020, November 5). Wikimedia Commons, the free
media repository. Retrieved 16:12, January 3, 2021
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Entire_Tanakh_scroll_set
.png&oldid=510216646.
27) (1454) Biblia Latina. [Mainz, printer of the 42-line bible johann gutenberg between
1454 and 1455?, not after 1456] [Image] Retrieved from the Library of Congress,
https://www.loc.gov/item/52002339/.
28) File:FirstSurahKoran (fragment).jpg. (2020, July 26). Wikimedia Commons, the free
media repository. Retrieved 16:11, January 3, 2021
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:FirstSurahKoran_(fragm
ent).jpg&oldid=435254962.

29) File:Maqamat hariri.jpg. (2017, December 1). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Maqamat_hariri.jpg&oldi
d=270173111.
30) File:Jerus-n4i.jpg. (2018, April 20). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository.
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Jerus-
n4i.jpg&oldid=297739091.
31) File:Giza-pyramids.JPG. (2018, March 10). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Giza-
pyramids.JPG&oldid=291660347.
32) File:Ethiopian - Hand Cross - Walters 52297.jpg. (2017, December 9). Wikimedia
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Ethiopian_-
_Hand_Cross_-_Walters_52297.jpg&oldid=271144565.
33) File:Shiva Pashupati.jpg. (2018, May 21). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Shiva_Pashupati.jpg&old
id=302418058.
34) File:Greatwall large.jpg. (2017, July 17). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Greatwall_large.jpg&oldi
d=252053550.
35) File:StaCeciliaAcatitlan.jpg. (2015, April 6). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:StaCeciliaAcatitlan.jpg&
oldid=156147950.
36) File:Uxmal nunnery by Catherwood 02.jpg. (2017, February 8). Wikimedia Commons,
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Uxmal_nunnery_by_Cat
herwood_02.jpg&oldid=232842180.
37) File:Castillo Maler.jpg. (2016, October 19). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Castillo_Maler.jpg&oldi
d=210214129.
38) File:Machupicchu hb10.jpg. (2018, February 17). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Machupicchu_hb10.jpg&
oldid=287781000.
39) File:Machupicchu intihuatana.JPG. (2017, February 28). Wikimedia Commons, the
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Machupicchu_intihuatan
a.JPG&oldid=235515994.
40) File:Olmec King.jpg. (2017, November 25). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Olmec_King.jpg&oldid=
269064670.
41) File:QtubIronPillar.JPG. (2015, March 23). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:QtubIronPillar.JPG&oldi
d=154418181.
42) File:Eckert4.jpg. (2017, May 4). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository.
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Eckert4.jpg&oldid=2428
54519.

43) File:Double-Spiral Pin LACMA M.76.97.672.jpg. (2014, August 31). Wikimedia

from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Double-
Spiral_Pin_LACMA_M.76.97.672.jpg&oldid=133286541.
44) File:Louvre 042005 06.jpg. (2018, July 6). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Louvre_042005_06.jpg&
oldid=309995139.
45) Gold and Silver Rings Photo by Jacek Dylag on Unsplash
46) File:Quipu.png. (2018, April 30). Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository.
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Quipu.png&oldid=29915
8724.
47) File:Pouring gold.jpg. (2017, September 27). Wikimedia Commons, the free media
from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Pouring_gold.jpg&oldid
=260140588.
REFERENCES AND FURTHER READINGS
Part 1 – Understanding Science and its Limitation
1) A lecture given at Peterhouse, Cambridge, in Summer 1953, as part of a course on

Developments and trends in contemporary British philosophy, organized by the British
Council; originally published under the title 'Philosophy of Science: a Personal Report'
in British Philosophy in Mid-Century, ed. C. A. Mace, 1957. Retrieved April 22, 2019
from https://webfiles.uci.edu/rsmead/PHIL330/Readings/Popper%20-
%20Science%20-%20Conjectures%20and%20Refutations.pdf
2) Aikenhead, G. (2005). Research Into STS Science Education. Educación Química,
16(3), 384. https://doi.org/10.22201/fq.18708404e.2005.3.66101
3) Aikenhead, G. (2003). STS Education: A Rose by Any Other Name.
4) Aldrich, J. (1995). Correlations Genuine and Spurious in Pearson and Yule. Statistical
Science, 10(4), 364–376. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177009870
5) Andersen, H. and Hepburn, B., "Scientific Method", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (Summer 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2016/entries/scientific-method/>.
6) Arthur, W. (2009). The nature of technology: what it is and how it evolves. New York:
Free Press.
7) Bird, Alexander, "Thomas Kuhn", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter
2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/thomas-kuhn/>.
8) Boghossian, P. (2006). Fear of knowledge: against relativism and constructivism.
Oxford Oxford New York: Clarendon Press Oxford University Press.
9) Booth, W., Colomb, G. & Williams, J. (2008). The craft of research. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
10) Brody, T. & Hodgson, P. (1993). The philosophy behind physics. Berlin New York:
Springer-Verlag.
11) Brush, S. G. (1999). Why was Relativity Accepted? Physics in Perspective, 1(2), 184–
214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s000160050015
12) Bunge, M. (1998). Philosophy of science. New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction
Publishers.
13) Carnap, R. (1991). Logical Foundations of the Unity of Science. In Richard Boyd &
Philip Gasper (eds.), The Philosophy of Science. MIT Press.

14) Cohen, I. B. (Ed.). (1994). The Natural Sciences and the Social Sciences. Boston
Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Springer Netherlands.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3391-5
15) Descombes, V. (2016). The Order of Things: An Archaeology of What? History and
Theory, 55(4), 66–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/hith.10829
16) Engler, G. (1994). From Art and Science to Perception: The Role of Aesthetics.
Leonardo, 27(3), 207. https://doi.org/10.2307/1576053
17) Feyerabend, P. (1993). Against method. London New York: Verso.
18) Feyerabend, P. (1987). Farewell to reason. London New York: Verso.
19) Feyerabend, P. (1985). Philosophical papers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20) Feyerabend, P. (1981). Realism, rationalism, and scientific method. Cambridge New
York: Cambridge University Press.
21) Feyerabend, P. (1978). Science in a free society. London: NLB.
22) Foucault, M. (1994). The order of things: an archaeology of the human sciences. New
York: Vintage Books.
23) Galison, P. (1987). How experiments end. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
24) Giannini, A. J., Barringer, M. E., Giannini, M. C., & Loiselle, R. H. (1984). Lack of
Relationship Between Handedness and Intuitive and Intellectual (Rationalistic) Modes
of Information Processing. The Journal of General Psychology, 111(1), 31–37.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1984.9921094
25) Göhner, J. F., & Schrenk, M. (n.d.). Metaphysics of Science. Retrieved April 23, 2019,
from https://www.iep.utm.edu/met-scie/
26) Hansson, S. O., "Science and Pseudo-Science", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/pseudo-science/>.
27) Heilbron, J. (2003). The Oxford companion to the history of modern science. Oxford
New York: Oxford University Press.
28) Henderson, Leah, "The Problem of Induction", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (Spring 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/induction-problem/>.
29) Hume, D. & Beauchamp, T. (2000). An enquiry concerning human understanding: a
critical edition. Oxford New York: Clarendon Press Oxford University Press.
30) Jasanoff, S. (2003). Breaking the Waves in Science Studies. Social Studies of Science,
33(3), 389–400. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127030333004
31) Klein, G. (2003). Intuition at work : why developing your gut instincts will make you
better at what you do. New York: Currency/Doubleday.
32) Kornfeld, W. A., & Hewitt, C. E. (1981). The Scientific Community Metaphor. IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 11(1), 24–33.
https://doi.org/10.1109/tsmc.1981.4308575
33) Krebs, R. & Krebs, C. (2003). Groundbreaking scientific experiments, inventions, and
discoveries of the ancient world. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.
34) Kuhn, T. & Hacking, I. (2012). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago
London: The University of Chicago Press.
35) Kuhn, T. (1977). The essential tension: selected studies in scientific tradition and
change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36) Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
37) Lakatos, I., Feyerabend, P. & Motterlini, M. (1999). For and against method: including
Lakatos's lectures on scientific method and the Lakatos-Feyerabend correspondence.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
38) Larsen, R., Buss, D., Wismeijer, A., & Song, J. (2013). Personality psychology:
Domains of knowledge about human nature. London: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
39) Longino, Helen, "The Social Dimensions of Scientific Knowledge", The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/scientific-knowledge-social/>.

40) Lövbrand, E., Pielke, R., Jr, & Beck, S. (2010). A Democracy Paradox in Studies of
Science and Technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 36(4), 474–496.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243910366154
41) Lutz, Matthew and Lenman, James, "Moral Naturalism", The Stanford Encyclopedia
of Philosophy (Fall 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/naturalism-moral/>.
42) Mansour, N. (2009). Science-Technology-Society (STS). Bulletin of Science,
Technology & Society, 29(4), 287–297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467609336307
43) Mikulak, A. (2011). Mismatches between “Scientific” and “Non-Scientific” Ways of
Knowing and Their Contributions to Public Understanding of Science. Integrative
Psychological and Behavioral Science, 45(2), 201–215.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-011-9157-8
44) Nickles, Thomas, "Scientific Revolutions", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
(Winter 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/scientific-revolutions/>.
45) Niiniluoto, Ilkka, "Scientific Progress", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
(Summer 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2015/entries/scientific-progress/>.
46) Nola, R. & Irzık, G. (2005). Philosophy, science, education and culture. Dordrecht
London: Springer.
47) Pedretti, E. (2005). STSE education: Principles and prac-tices. In: Aslop, S., Bencze,
L., Pedretti, E. Eds. Analys-ing Exemplary Science Teaching: Theoretical Lenses and
a Spectrum of Possibilities for Practice, Open University Press, Mc Graw-Hill
Education.
48) Popper, K. (2002). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge Classics.
49) Preston, John, "Paul Feyerabend", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/feyerabend/>.
50) Rescher, N. (1999). The limits of science. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: University of
Pittsburgh Press.
51) Rull, V. (2014). The most important application of science. EMBO Reports. 15(9):919-
922. doi:10.15252/embr.201438848.
52) Savaget, P., & Acero, L. (2017). Plurality in understandings of innovation,
sociotechnical progress and sustainable development: An analysis of OECD expert
narratives. Public Understanding of Science, 27(5), 611–628.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517695056
53) Schick, T. & Vaughn, L. (2002). How to think about weird things: critical thinking for
a New Age. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
54) Smith, P. (2003). Theory and reality: an introduction to the philosophy of science.
55) Sheehy, N., Chapman, A. & Conroy, W. (2002). Biographical Dictionary of
Psychology. New York Florence: RoutledgeTaylor & Francis Group distributor.
56) Shimamura, A. P. (2011). Toward a Science of Aesthetics Issues and ideas. In
Aesthetic Science Connecting Minds, Brains, and Experience (pp. 3–26). Oxford
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199732142.003.0010
57) Teller, E. (1998). Essays on Science and Society: Science and Morality. Science,
280(5367), 1200–1201. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5367.1200
58) Thompson, W. (2007). The nature of statistical evidence. New York: Springer.
59) Wikipedia contributors. (2019, April 20). Philosophy of science. In Wikipedia, The
Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 01:27, April 22, 2019, from
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philosophy_of_science&oldid=893342086
60) Wikipedia contributors. (2019, March 9). Science. In Wikipedia, The Free
Encyclopedia. Retrieved 01:25, April 22, 2019, from
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Science&oldid=886903727
61) Wilson, E. (1998). Consilience : the unity of knowledge. New York: Knopf
Distributed by Random House.

62) Yeatman, A. (1996). The Roles of Scientific and Non-Scientific Types of Knowledge
in the Improvement of Practice. Australian Journal of Education, 40(3), 284–301.
https://doi.org/10.1177/000494419604000306
Part 2 – Science as a System of Knowledge
1) "Artificial and Natural Languages." Encyclopedia of Philosophy. . Retrieved May 19,

2019 from Encyclopedia.com:
https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-
maps/artificial-and-natural-languages
2) Bertalanffy, L. (1969). General system theory : foundations, development,
applications. New York: George Braziller.
3) Bertalanffy, L. (1950). An outline of general system theory. The British Journal for the
Philosophy of Science, I(2), 134–165. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/i.2.134
4) Boardman, J., & Sauser, B. (2008). Systems Thinking. CRC Press.
https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420054927
5) d’Errico, F., & Stringer, C. B. (2011). Evolution, revolution or saltation scenario for
the emergence of modern cultures? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B:
Biological Sciences, 366(1567), 1060–1069. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0340
6) Dori, D. (2002). Object-Process Methodology. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-56209-9
7) Feynman, R., Morinigo, F., Wagner, W. & Hatfield, B. (1995). Feynman lectures on
gravitation. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley.
8) Friedenberg, J. & Silverman, G. (2016). Cognitive science : an introduction to the
study of mind. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.
9) Hammond, D. (2010). The science of synthesis : exploring the social implications of
general systems theory. Boulder, Colo: University Press of Colorado.
10) Hassan, N. R., Mingers, J., & Stahl, B. (2018). Philosophy and information systems:
where are we and where should we go? European Journal of Information Systems,
27(3), 263–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085x.2018.1470776
11) Heilbron, J. (2003). The Oxford companion to the history of modern science. Oxford
New York: Oxford University Press.
12) Heylighen, F. (2000): "Referencing pages in Principia Cybernetica Web", in: F.
Heylighen, C. Joslyn and V. Turchin (editors): Principia Cybernetica Web (Principia
Cybernetica, Brussels), URL: http://cleamc11.vub.ac.be/REFERPCP.html.
13) Hodgson, G. M. (1987). Economics and Systems Theory. Journal of Economic
Studies, 14(4), 65–86. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb002655
14) Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe : the search for laws of self-organization
and complexity. New York: Oxford University Press.
15) Lerner, V. S. (2004). Introduction to information systems theory: concepts, formalism
and applications. International Journal of Systems Science, 35(7), 405–424.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00207720410001734183
16) Meadows, D. & Wright, D. (2008). Thinking in systems : a primer. White River
Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.
17) Mele, C., Pels, J., & Polese, F. (2010). A Brief Review of Systems Theories and Their
Managerial Applications. Service Science, 2(1–2), 126–135.
https://doi.org/10.1287/serv.2.1_2.126
18) Miller, J. G., & Miller, J. L. (1995). Applications of living systems theory. Systems
Practice, 8(1), 19–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02249174
19) Miller, J. L., & Miller, J. G. (1993). Greater than the sum of its parts II. Matter-energy
processing subsystems. Behavioral Science, 38(3), 151–163.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830380302
20) Miller, J. L., & Miller, J. G. (1992). Greater than the sum of its parts. I. subsystems
which process both matter-energy and information. Behavioral Science, 37(1), 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830370102

21) Nowell, A. (2010). Defining Behavioral Modernity in the Context of Neandertal and
Anatomically Modern Human Populations. Annual Review of Anthropology, 39(1),
437–452. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.012809.105113
22) Seibt, J. (2018) "Process Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/process-philosophy/>.
23) Sillitto, Hillary & , Ceng & Dori, Dov & Griego, Regina & Jackson, Scott & Krob,
Daniel & , Cesames & Godfrey, Patrick & , Deng & Arnold, Eileen & Martin, James.
(2017). Defining " System " : a Comprehensive Approach
24) Smorra, C., Sellner, S., Borchert, M. J., Harrington, J. A., Higuchi, T., Nagahama, H.,
… Ulmer, S. (2017). A parts-per-billion measurement of the antiproton magnetic
moment. Nature, 550(7676), 371–374. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24048
25) Stenlund, S. (1990). Language and philosophical problems. London New York:
Routledge.
26) Swanson, G. A. (2006). James Grier Miller’s Living Systems Theory (LST). Systems
Research and Behavioral Science, 23(3), 263–271. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.724
27) Troncale, L. (2006). Towards a science of systems. Systems Research and Behavioral
Science, 23(3), 301–321. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.729
28) Williams, T. (1985). Systems: Concepts, methodologies and applications. Futures,
17(6), 678–680. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(85)90021-7
29) Wilson, E. (1998). Consilience : the unity of knowledge. New York: Knopf Distributed
by Random House.
30) Bunge, M. (1998). Philosophy of science. New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction
Publishers.
31) C. L. Crouch; Genesis 1:26–7 As a statement of humanity’s divine parentage, The
Journal of Theological Studies, Volume 61, Issue 1, 1 April 2010, Pages 1–
15, https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/flp185
32) Christian Feest. http://philosophyalevel.com/aqa-philosophy-revision-notes
33) Craver, Carl and Tabery, James, "Mechanisms in Science", The Stanford Encyclopedia
of Philosophy (Spring 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/science-mechanisms/>.
34) Crowell, Steven, "Existentialism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/existentialism/>.
35) Dea, Shannon, Walsh, Julie and Lennon, Thomas M., "Continental Rationalism", The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),
URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/continental-rationalism/>.
36) Guyer, Paul and Horstmann, Rolf-Peter, "Idealism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/idealism/>.
37) Henderson, Leah, "The Problem of Induction", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/induction-problem/>.
38) Hookway, Christopher, "Pragmatism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2016/entries/pragmatism/>.
39) Ichikawa, Jonathan Jenkins and Steup, Matthias, "The Analysis of Knowledge", The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),
URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/knowledge-analysis/>.
40) Lakatos, I., Feyerabend, P. & Motterlini, M. (1999). For and against method:
including Lakatos's lectures on scientific method and the Lakatos-Feyerabend
correspondence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41) Kuhn, Thomas S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago :University
of Chicago Press.


44) Margolis, Eric and Laurence, Stephen, "Concepts", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/concepts/>.
45) Markie, Peter, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/rationalism-empiricism/>.
46) Miller, Alexander, "Realism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016
Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/realism/>.
47) Nickles, Thomas, "Scientific Revolutions", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/scientific-revolutions/>.
48) Parikh R., Renero A. (2017) Justified True Belief: Plato, Gettier, and Turing. In:
Floyd J., Bokulich A. (eds) Philosophical Explorations of the Legacy of Alan
Turing. Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, vol 324.
Springer, Cham
49) Perla, R. J., & Parry, G. J. (2011). The epistemology of quality improvement: it’s all
Greek. BMJ Quality & Safety, 20(Suppl_1), i24–i27.
http://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs.2010.046557
50) Rescher, N. (1999). The limits of science. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: University of
Pittsburgh Press.
51) Rull, V. (2014). The most important application of science. EMBO Reports.
15(9):919-922. doi:10.15252/embr.201438848.
52) Samet, Jerry, "The Historical Controversies Surrounding Innateness", The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/innateness-history/>.
53) Smith, P. (2003). Theory and reality: an introduction to the philosophy of science.
54) Wikipedia contributors. (2019, April 20). Philosophy of science. In Wikipedia, The
Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 01:27, April 22, 2019, from
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philosophy_of_science&oldid=893342086
55) Wikipedia contributors. (2019, March 9). Science. In Wikipedia, The Free
Encyclopedia. Retrieved 01:25, April 22, 2019, from
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Science&oldid=886903727
Part 3 – Human Behavior and the Development of Society
1) Alfred William Howitt: The Native tribes of South-East Australia. Online: archive.org
2) Avery, J. (2017). Science & society. New Jersey: World Scientific.
3) Aylesworth, Gary, "Postmodernism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2015/entries/postmodernism/>.
4) Bristow, William, "Enlightenment", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/enlightenment/>.
5) Bryant, C. D., & Peck, D. L. (2007). 21st century sociology: A reference handbook.
Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
6) Casadevall A, Fang FC. 2016. Revolutionary science. mBio 7(2):e00158-16.
doi:10.1128/mBio.00158-16.
7) Cribbin, G., Robinson, M. E. & Shimwell, D. W. 1999 ‘Re-asssessing the logboat
from Lurgan townland, Co. Galway, Ireland’ in Antiquity, Vo. 73, No. 282, pp. 903-
908.
8) Culture and Civilization. (n.d.). Arts, Sciences, and Economics, 1-7. doi:10.1007/3-
540-34424-1_1

9) DeCorse, C. R., & Scupin, R. (2016). Anthropology: The basics.

10) Fitch, W. T., Huber, L., & Bugnyar, T. (2010). Social Cognition and the Evolution of
Language: Constructing Cognitive Phylogenies. Neuron, 65(6), 795–814.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2010.03.011
11) Giddens, A., & Griffiths, S. (2006). Sociology. Cambridge: Polity.
12) Grant, G. (2004). Hawai`i Looking Back: An illustrated History of the Islands, Mutual
Publishing, pp. 454pp
13) Hancock, A.M., Witonsky, D.B.,Ehler, E., Alkorta-Aranburu, G., Beall, C.,
Gebremedhin, A., Sukernik, R., Utermann, G., Pritchard, J., Coop, G., Di Rienzo, A.
(2010). Human adaptations to diet, subsistence, and ecoregion are due to subtle shifts
in allele frequency. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences May 2010, 107
(Supplement 2) 8924-8930; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0914625107
14) Heyes, C. (2012). New thinking: the evolution of human cognition. Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1599), 2091–2096.
http://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0111
15) Kottak, C. P. (2010). Window on humanity: A concise introduction to anthropology.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
16) Kuhn, Thomas S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
17) Little, D., "Philosophy of History", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/history/>.
19) MacLean, E. L. (2016). Unraveling the evolution of uniquely human
cognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, 113(23), 6348–6354. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1521270113
20) March, A. (1899). The history and conquest of the Philippines and our other island
possessions: Embracing our war with the Filipinos in 1899. Philadelphia: World Bible
House.
21) Massey, D. S. (2002). A Brief History of Human Society: The Origin and Role of
Emotion in Social Life: 2001 Presidential Address. American Sociological
Review,67(1), 1. doi:10.2307/3088931
22) McCabe, D. P., Roediger, H. L., McDaniel, M. A., Balota, D. A., & Hambrick, D. Z.
(2010). The Relationship Between Working Memory Capacity and Executive
Functioning: Evidence for a Common Executive Attention
Construct. Neuropsychology, 24(2), 222–243. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0017619
23) Meek Lange, Margaret, "Progress", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/progress/>.
24) Nijar, G.S. (2013). Traditional Knowledge Systems, International Law and National
Challenges: Marginalization or Emancipation? European Journal of International Law,
Volume 24, Issue 4, , pg 1205–1221, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/cht077
25) North, M. S., & Fiske, S. T. (2012). A history of social cognition. In A. W. Kruglanski
& W. Stroebe (Eds.), Handbook of the history of social psychology (pp. 81-99). New
York, NY, US: Psychology Press.
26) Peoples, H.C., Duda, P. & Marlowe, F.W. Hum Nat (2016) 27: 261.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-016-9260-0
27) Purves D, Augustine GJ, Fitzpatrick D, et al., editors. Neuroscience. 2nd edition.
Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates; 2001. The Development of Language: A
Critical Period in Humans. Available from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11007/
28) Rundell, J. (n.d.). Introduction: Civilization, Culture and the Human Self-
Image. Classical Readings in Culture and Civilization, 1-35.
doi:10.4324/9781351227025-1

29) Scupin, Raymond & DeCorse, Christopher. (2016). Anthropology: A Global

Perspective, 8th edition
30) Techno-complex. (n.d.) The Great Soviet Encyclopedia, 3rd Edition. (1970-1979).
Retrieved August 30 2018 from https://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Techno-
complex
31) Tomasello, M. (2004). Language, 80(2), 325-327. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4489668
32) Usher, A. P. 1988. A history of mechanical inventions. New York: Dover
Publications.
33) Viergever, M. (1999). Indigenous Knowledge: An Interpretation of Views from
Indigenous Peoples. In L. M. Semali & J. L. Kincheloe (Eds.), What is indigenous
knowledge? : Voices from the Academy / edited by Ladislaus M. Semali and Joe L.
Kincheloe (pp. 333 - 359): Garland Pub.
34) Wagner, P. (2008). Modernity as experience and interpretation: A new sociology of
modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
35) Wurz, S. (2012) The Transition to Modern Behavior. Nature Education
Knowledge 3(10):15.
Part 4 – Human Society as the Development of Science
1) Aikenhead, G. (2003). STS Education: A Rose by Any Other Name.

2) Avery, J. (2017). Science & society. New Jersey: World Scientific.
3) Amory Starr & Jason Adams (2003) Anti-globalization: The Global Fight for Local
Autonomy, New Political Science, 25:1, 19-42, DOI: 10.1080/0739314032000071217
4) Barker, G. (2006). The agricultural revolution in prehistory : why did foragers become
farmers. Oxford New York: Oxford University Press.
5) Bryant, C. D., & Peck, D. L. (2007). 21st century sociology: A reference handbook.
Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
6) Casadevall A, Fang FC. 2016. Revolutionary science. mBio 7(2):e00158-16.
doi:10.1128/mBio.00158-16.
7) Active/Cooperative Learning. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://fc.civil.tamu.edu/home/keycomponents/collaborative_learning.html
8) Culture and Civilization. (n.d.). Arts, Sciences, and Economics,1-7. doi:10.1007/3-
540-34424-1_1
9) Hall, J., & Watson, W. H. (1970). The effects of a normative intervention on group
decision-making performance. Human Relations, 23, 299–317.
10) Irving-Pease, E. K., Ryan, H., Jamieson, A., Dimopoulos, E. A., Larson, G., & Frantz,
L. A. F. (2018). Paleogenomics of Animal Domestication. In Population Genomics
(pp. 225–272). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/13836_2018_55
11) Kagan, S., & Kagan, M. (2015). Kagan Cooperative Learning: Dr. Spencer Kagan and
Miguel Kagan. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing.
12) Keith, L. (2005). Cultural Universals and Particulars. International Studies in
Philosophy,37(4), 175-178. doi:10.5840/intstudphil200537440
13) Kuhn, Thomas S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
14) Ladizinsky, G. (1998). Plant evolution under domestication. Dordrecht New York:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
15) Larson, G., & Fuller, D. Q. (2014). The Evolution of Animal Domestication. Annual
Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 45(1), 115–136.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110512-135813
16) Larson, G., Piperno, D. R., Allaby, R. G., Purugganan, M. D., Andersson, L., Arroyo-
Kalin, M., … Fuller, D. Q. (2014). Current perspectives and the future of
domestication studies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United
States of America, 111(17), 6139–6146. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1323964111

18) Lonner, W. J. (2013). Universals. The Encyclopedia of Cross-Cultural
Psychology,1308-1311. doi:10.1002/9781118339893.wbeccp553
20) Massey, D. S. (2002). A Brief History of Human Society: The Origin and Role of
Emotion in Social Life: 2001 Presidential Address. American Sociological
Review,67(1), 1. doi:10.2307/3088931
21) Meslec, N., & Curşeu, P. L. (2013). Too close or too far hurts cognitive distance and
group cognitive synergy. Small Group Research, 44, 471–497.
22) Pedretti, E. (2005). STSE education: Principles and prac-tices. In: Aslop, S., Bencze,
L., Pedretti, E. Eds. Analys-ing Exemplary Science Teaching: Theoretical Lenses and
a Spectrum of Possibilities for Practice, Open University Press, Mc Graw-Hill
Education.
23) David Pimentel, Bonnie Berger, David Filiberto, Michelle Newton, Benjamin Wolfe,
Elizabeth Karabinakis, Steven Clark, Elaine Poon, Elizabeth Abbett, Sudha
Nandagopal; Water Resources: Agricultural and Environmental Issues, BioScience,
Volume 54, Issue 10, 1 October 2004, Pages 909–918, https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-
3568(2004)054[0909:WRAAEI]2.0.CO;2
24) Rundell, J. (n.d.). Introduction: Civilization, Culture and the Human Self-
Image. Classical Readings in Culture and Civilization,1-35.
doi:10.4324/9781351227025-1
25) Scupin, Raymond & DeCorse, Christopher. (2016). Anthropology: A Global
Perspective, 8th edition
26) Serpell, J. & Barrett, P. (2017). The domestic dog: its evolution, behavior and
interactions with people. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
27) Usher, A. P. 1988. A history of mechanical inventions. New York: Dover
Publications.
28) UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (2002). UNESCO
29) Viergever, M. (1999). Indigenous Knowledge: An Interpretation of Views from
Indigenous Peoples. In L. M. Semali & J. L. Kincheloe (Eds.), What is indigenous
knowledge? : Voices from the Academy / edited by Ladislaus M. Semali and Joe L.
Kincheloe (pp. 333 - 359): Garland Pub.
30) Wagner, P. (2008). Modernity as experience and interpretation: A new sociology of
modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
31) Zeder, M. A. (2012). The Domestication of Animals. Journal of Anthropological
Research, 68(2), 161–190. https://doi.org/10.3998/jar.0521004.0068.201

STSE by AJCReboa Unit 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

STSE by AJCReboa Unit 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Science, Technology, Society, and the Environment (STSE) Alejandro Jose Carreon Reboa

Alejandro Jose Carreon Reboa

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 1 of 84

Part 2 – Science as a System of Knowledge ……………………………. 14

Part 3 – Human Behavior and the Development of Society …………... 33

Part 4 – Human Society as the Development of Science ………………. 52

Image Sources ……………………………………………………………. 69

References & Further Readings ………………………………………... 76

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 2 of 84

PART 1 – Understanding Science and its Limitation

Science, Technology, Society and Environment or STES is an interdisciplinary approach of

Knowledge and Modern Science

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 3 of 84

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 4 of 84

Subtleties of Modern Science

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 5 of 84

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 6 of 84

Social Sciences - Describe and explain human behavior and consciousness

Formal Systems - Understand and utilize numbers, mathematical operations, logical

Applied Sciences - Utilize and develop theoretical knowledge to purposive,

Life  Microbiological basis of infectious diseases (germ theory, Koch postulates)

Physical  Discovery of electricity and magnetism led to how electromagnetic energy

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 7 of 84

 Understanding of classical mechanics and thermodynamics principles led to

Social  Improvement of economics, governance and education systems by laying

Formal  Mathematical and statistical symbols and operations, including logical

Human knowledge is essentially differentiated by modern science as either scientific or non-

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 8 of 84

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 9 of 84

Consequently, scientific knowledge thus advances according to existing scientific paradigms

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 10 of 84

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 11 of 84

STSE as Science Education

In face of digital information, globalization, cultural mixing, environmental degradation,

 Philosophical – This perspective of understanding the aspects science and technology is

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 12 of 84

REALITY AND APPLICATION

“Scientia potentia est”

Nuclear physics proves to be a powerhouse of knowledge providing great theoretical details of

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 13 of 84

PART 2 – Science as a System of Knowledge

Human knowledge is essentially differentiated by modern science as either scientific or non-

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 14 of 84

Though used accordingly different by many disciplines of knowledge, generally "system" is

A system is usually composed of a smaller component system called subsystem. A subsystem on

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 15 of 84

Socio-cultural systems are composed of anthropogenic components primarily

Artificial systems are usually human-made attribution of relationship and

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 16 of 84

Figure 2.1 – A “system” is an intellectual framework created by us humans to picture-out,

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 17 of 84

Sciences as Systems of Concepts about Nature, Society, and Knowledge

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 18 of 84

Natural Field of Sciences and Important

Weak Nuclear Force or “Weak Force” Physical Sciences

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 19 of 84

Dark Matter or “Invisible Matter”

Energy Life Sciences

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 20 of 84

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 21 of 84

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 22 of 84

Systematic Body of Knowledge

Polytechnic University of the Philippines Page 23 of 84