Epistemological Turn in European Scientific Rationality

Outline of scientific rational recognition theory in Europe: If the 17th century can be regarded as the century of scientific reform, this century is one of anti-reform in every sense. The ideology of this century can be seen in tremendous efforts to build the foundations of the 17th and 18th centuries, totally failed, and to complete the scientific development that attempted to rebuild the foundation (eg: Hilbert 's official program, Gödel). Incompleteness) theorem, Charlie's hierarchical cosmology theory, Friedman's evolution cosmology, Newtonian dynamics, quantum mechanics in relativity and / or physics, logical steering

Discussion of colonialism and science has two different views. One is the scientific epistemology and its origins. As a physicist, I was taught that physics began with Greeks, and later Europeans inherited their thoughts and extended them. In this story, African people and other people are relatively beginners in science, the problem of inclusiveness and diversity of science is "science to underestimated minorities and color groups It is related to bringing in. The problem with this story is that it is not true. For example, many "Greeks" are actually Egyptians and Mesopotamians under Greek rule. Thus, although science has been developed mainly by Europeans in the past 500 years, the roots of its methodology and epistemology are not European. Scientists understand that science is not fundamentally the origin of Europe.

The concept of evidence is extremely important to epistemology and philosophy of science. In epistemology, evidence is often thought to be related to legitimate beliefs, which in turn is considered necessary for knowledge. Understanding the evidence is extremely important in order to understand the two main purposes of epistemological concern, namely knowledge and legitimate beliefs. In philosophy of science, evidence is believed to be evidence to prove or refute scientific theory, thus constituting the rationale for us to reasonably judge the possibility of competition in the world. From this point of view, understanding the evidence is essential for understanding the normal behavior of scientific causes.

Scientific skepticism or reasonable skepticism (also known as skepticism) is also called a skeptical inquiry, a practical epistemological position that doubts the credibility of assertions lacking empirical evidence is. In fact, this term is most often used to examine arguments and theories that seem to be beyond mainstream science, not regular discussions or tasks by scientists. Scientific skepticism is different from philosophical skepticism which doubts human ability to the essence of the world and how they perceive all the knowledge of the world. Methodological skepticism is a systematic process of skepticism about the credibility of human beliefs, but it is similar, but clear. The new skepticism described by Paul Kurtz is scientific skepticism. For example, Robert K. Merton claims that all ideas need to be tested and subject to a strict and organized community review (as described in the Merton Code).