1

Philosophy Question

Student's Name

Institution Affiliation

Course Title

Instructors Name

Date of submission
 2

Introduction
As new hypotheses and discoveries are being developed, the scientific understanding of the

natural world is continually changing. The Theory of Special Relativity and the Theory of

Spontaneous Generation are two theories that have profoundly influenced our perception of the

universe. While the latter is a pseudoscientific idea debunked by scientific data, the former is a

generally acknowledged and well-established scientific hypothesis. To clarify the distinction

between scientific theories and pseudoscientific views, we shall examine these two ideas in this

article utilizing the hypothetico-deductive model and Karl Popper's theory of distinction. The

purpose of this essay is to show how scientific approaches, such as the hypothetico-deductive

model and Karl Popper's theory of demarcation, can be used to discriminate between true

scientific theories and untrue beliefs, as well as to assess the reliability of scientific theories

(Godfrey-Smith, 2003). We will also investigate how these theories have influenced our

comprehension of the natural world and what effects our analysis has on the accuracy and

dependability of these theories.

The Theory of Special Relativity

Albert Einstein put out the Theory of Special Relativity as a scientific theory in 1905. It asserts

that regardless of an observer's relative velocity, the laws of physics apply to all observers in

uniform motion. This theory established the idea of time dilation and length contraction, which

argues that when observers observe various states of motion, time and distance appear to be

different. The idea has undergone considerable testing and is backed by a wealth of experimental

data, including the well-known Michelson and Morley experiments and the observation of light

being refracted by enormous objects.

 3

This idea is supported by the well-known Michelson-Morley experiment, which demonstrated

that regardless of the observer's motion, light travelling in the same direction moves at the same

speed. This theory passes Popper's test since it can anticipate what would happen under specific

circumstances, such as when the observer is moving or not, as it assumes that the speed of light

is constant. The theory is invalid if the predictions don't come true.

A substantial volume of experimental data has been used to verify and validate the theory of

Special Relativity, which is a widely recognized scientific theory. It is a valid scientific

hypothesis that has significantly impacted how we perceive space and time, passing Karl

Popper's test of demarcation (Godfrey-Smith, 2003).

Hypothetico-deductive Model:

Hypothesis: The laws of physics are the same for all observers in uniform motion, regardless of

their relative velocity.

Anticipated Observations: The time dilation and length contraction, the deflection of light by

massive objects, and the Michelson and Morley experiment results.

Karl Popper's Theory of Demarcation:

According to Karl Popper's principle of demarcation, theories must be testable to qualify as

scientific (Godfrey-Smith, 2003). The Theory of Special Relativity passes this test because it

makes testable predictions that can be verified as true, such as time dilation and length

contraction, the deflection of light by large objects, and the outcomes of the Michelson and

Morley experiment. However, the idea has been strongly confirmed by experimental data that

shows how well these predictions have been tested. Making testable predictions is also a vital

component of scientific theories since it enables the scientific community to assess and confirm a
 4

theory's viability (Godfrey-Smith, 2003). A large portion of the scientific community's

acceptance and endorsement of the Theory of Special Relativity can be attributed to its

consistency with a wide range of experimental evidence and its capacity to make testable

predictions.

The Theory of Spontaneous Generation

The theory of spontaneous generation is a pseudoscientific belief that living organisms can arise

from non-living matter. According to the theory, small animals, such as mice, flies, and worms,

could arise from decaying matter like mud or decaying food. This theory was widely accepted in

the past. Still, it was disproven in the 19th century by the experiments of Louis Pasteur and John

Tyndall, who showed that microorganisms could only come from other microorganisms and not

from non-living matter. The theory of spontaneous generation is not supported by any scientific

evidence and is rejected by the scientific community.

The discovery that maggots frequently appeared in decomposing meat that had not been in

contact with other live organisms throughout the 17th and 18th centuries helped bolster the

notion, which scientists widely accepted. Due to the impossibility of conducting a test to

determine whether the theory is valid, it violates Popper's test. The inability to test every

conceivable combination of non-living substances renders it impossible to demonstrate that

creatures cannot spontaneously develop. The hypothesis cannot be falsified, which means it

cannot be disproven.

Hypothetico-deductive Model:

Hypothesis: Living organisms can arise from non-living matter.

 5

Anticipated Observations: N/A, as the theory is not supported by any scientific evidence and

makes no testable predictions.

Karl Popper's Theory of Demarcation:

According to Karl Popper's definition of science, a theory must be falsifiable to be considered

valid. This means it must include testable hypotheses that can be disproved in theory (Godfrey-

Smith, 2003). Contrary to popular belief, the notion of spontaneous generation contends that live

things can develop out of non-living materials without any prior cause. This claim cannot be

meaningfully examined or disproved since no means exists. This idea is also unscientific because

it needs to be supported by scientific data. As a result of the Theory of Spontaneous Generation's

failure to satisfy the requirements for a legitimate scientific theory, Karl Popper's Theory of

Demarcation rejected it.

Conclusion

The analysis findings, based on Karl Popper's theory of demarcation and the hypothetico-

deductive model, show that the theory of special relativity is scientifically accepted while the

theory of spontaneous generation is not. This is because the theory of special relativity has

support from science, whereas the idea of spontaneous generation does not. Accordingly, the

idea of spontaneous creation is invalid, whereas the theory of special relativity is trustworthy and

genuine. In addition, it's crucial to remember that this analysis emphasizes the value of the

hypothetico-deductive model and Karl Popper's theory of demarcation to determine the integrity

of scientific hypotheses. These models offer a precise mechanism for separating true scientific

hypotheses from false views. These models enable scientists and philosophers to distinguish
 6

between theories supported by science and those not. Hypothetico-deductive model and Karl

Popper's theory of demarcation have distinguished the two theories.

 7

References

GODFREY-SMITH, P. (2003) an introduction to the philosophy of science, THEORY AND

REALITY. The University of Chicago Press / Chicago and London.