Science And Philosophy Essay, Research Paper

In my analysis of the philosophy of science, I will attempt to give an analysis

of Aristotle?s demonstration and scientific knowledge starting points and how

they apply to his theory, his definition in sciences, and scientific enquires of

the various questions posted as well as his ideals of explanation, which gives

clear ideal of his theory points in his premises. Aristotle starting points of

sciences are definitions, existence proposition and general logical truth, which

can only be grasped and not demonstrated. They are not verbal but give inner or

essential nature of natural kinds, pertaining to the science. From these stating

points one may deduce valid syllogisms with further characteristics that

necessarily have virtue of essential value, in comparation to Euclid?s

geometry who?s starting points are definitions, postulates and common

principles. Aristotle starting points, which is the axioms- the demonstrated

truths are its propositions that have been proven. In order to acquire such a

scientific knowledge of theorems demonstration must infers its validility from

premises, which are true, necessary and unspurious. We think we possess we

scientific knowledge, when we assume knowledge of the causes. This is not

possible, because having scientific knowledge is being in this condition, and

those who think they have this knowledge are not, but those who do really are.

Which follows that anything of scientific knowledge cannot be otherwise. Nous

(starting -points which are themselves knowable) grasps indemontratible starting

points. Therefore, if scientific knowledge is what we say it is then

demonstrative knowledge depends on premises of truth, which are primitive and

immediate. The conclusion must give the true reasons of facts mentioned.

Aristotle example of this is the nearness of the planets and why they do not

twinkle. He argues that the starting points of demonstration are necessary

because they are truth and demonstration knowledge comes from necessary starting

points. Deductive starting points cannot be proven and do not have to be grasped

? these are called posits. A posit assumes that something is or something is

not, a supposition; without assumption it is a definition. He is insistent in

the usage of appropriate premises and methods of questions under discussuion,

being that one cannot give proof by crossing over from another kind. Aristotle

requirements for the premises of demonstrations have unwelcome consequences,

because scientific laws alone gives no hope of the full explanation of

individual events, being that any full explanation must include facts about

environment and preceding conditions. Aristotle scientific enquiry proceeds that

things in which we seek are those we know, which are the ?that?, the

?why?, whether something is, and what is. If knowing a proposition that is

demonstrated involves knowing the demonstration of it then obviously we must

then distinguish two types of knowledge ? ?weak knowledge? the enquiry,

and ? strong knowledge?, the discovery. Which gives confidence that some

proposition is scientifically explicable. The important point being that at any

given stage in scientific progress of laws and connections have provided the

framework, which are guidelines to determine some newly observed conjunction of

events is law-governed. Aristotle?s ideal of explanations leaves us to make

such additions and qualifications that are necessary to accommodate other

essentials qualities of his theory. It seems unlikely to assume that such

departures occur and such masses exits in the in demonstration starting points

of science. In conclusion, it would be wrong to suggest that science is a matter

of explanation, because science is also reasons derived from knowledge. It is

not only concerned with good, but also with what is necessary. Science need

starting points which must be demonstrated in order to provide proven theories.

Nevertheless Aristotle is still venerated in the conscientious role he has

played in defining scientific definition in theory, providing us with many of

those starting points. He is still accredited today for many of his important

ideas and concepts, which has generalized theories of sciences.