What is the scientific method and how does it work?

All the keys to understand what the scientific method is for.

Without science we would not have reached our current level of development. Thanks to the scientific method, mankind has been creating great medical and technological advances, and even the field of psychology, one aspect of which is the scientific method.And even the field of psychology, an aspect of reality that seemed too confusing and ambiguous to be analyzed, has developed to the point of allowing us to know well what lies behind our actions and thoughts.

What is the importance of the scientific method?

However, what is the real reason for the scientific method? what is the real reason why science has so much prestige? Where exactly does its value lie? And why is it necessary to use the scientific method for science to progress?

I will try to shed some light on the issue at hand by starting at the root of the matter: the birth of science.

The origins of science and its epistemology

During the 6th century, in Ionia (a part of ancient Greece located in present-day Turkey), a world full of mysteries appeared before the Hellenes. The starting point was a situation of almost total uncertainty, but little by little, from the observation of nature, the ideas of an orderly and rational Universe began to emerge, the ideas of an orderly and rational Universe, susceptible of being analyzed, began to emerge..

At the beginning, a good part of the Greeks believed that reality was made up of a matter composed of an essence of which there was hardly any knowledge, governed by the action of equal and opposite forces that were in dramatic struggle, always maintaining an eternal equilibrium. At that historical moment and from these concepts arose a primitive science (or proto-sciencebecause, rather than experimenting, it theorized) properly Greek.

The Renaissance brings the change of paradigm.

It was not until the 16th century, with the arrival of the Renaissance in Europe, that a qualitative leap in scientific-technical knowledge began. began a qualitative leap in scientific-technical knowledge that would culminate in the 18th century A.D. with the Enlightenment..

In this scientific revolution, many medieval prejudices that had been carried over (some) since antiquity were abandoned, and a concrete and effective method for ascertaining the truth was consolidated: the scientific method, which would make it possible to examine all aspects of scientific knowledge. would make it possible to examine all aspects of nature in the best possible way..

And why "scientific"?

Science and its method were not arrived at by chance, but by survival.. Early human civilization was always challenged by major catastrophes (wars, floods, epidemics, etc.) that required a protocol that could give us reliability in the production of new knowledge to be able to face these adversities satisfactorily.

Thanks to the scientific method we could abandon the eternal paralysis produced by not understanding what is happening or what may happen in the future, because we began to have good reasons to think that something is false or true... although, ironically speaking, doubting is part of the scientific method and the skeptical spirit that accompanies it. In the words of American physicist Robert Oppenheimer:

"A scientist must take the liberty to raise any question, to doubt any statement, to correct errors."

The role of the brain

But it is not only catastrophes that are the cause of the scientific method. One of the reasons for its birth is none other than our capacity for reasoning, a miracle of evolution that enables us to avoid and resolve errors of logic, cognitive biases and errors in perception. In short, we can see the logic of things because our brains are structured in a way that allows us to examine premises and arguments for consistency and coherence.

However, as relatively instinctive and emotional animals that we are, the level of cognitive abilities needed to be absolutely skeptical and rational (someone who knows how to recognize and perfectly order ideas and theories to detect flaws in them) is impossible even for the most educated and intelligent people. That is why science is, in part, a shared project based on the consensus of many experts and specialists who offer their different points of view. and specialists who offer their different points of view.

The scientific approach

It follows from the above that science is not done by four geniuses or enlightened individuals (the opposite would be to make scientific knowledge rely entirely on a fallacy of authority). On the contrary, is the fruit of collective cooperation: the so-called scientific community.

Scientific knowledge is built on previous knowledge, investing decades of research during which numerous experiments are carried out (the double-blind test). double-blindfor example) and hypotheses and theories are proposed. In fact, the scientific procedure is so collective that scientists often ask their professional colleagues (the scientific community) to review possible errors in their studies (even if this means that their alleged discoveries are denied). This has the advantage that the more scientists doing research, the more likely it is that they will find errors in previous research and conclusions..

Pursuing scientific objectivity

It is clear that absolute objectivity does not exist even in the hard sciences.However, this does not mean that it cannot be taken as a reference or an ideal. That is why another of the pragmatic characteristics of the scientific procedure is to delegate responsibilities in the investigation and elaboration of hypotheses to auxiliary scientists who are not emotionally involved in the project.

This ensures greater objectivity, an essential characteristic of all science. These auxiliary scientists repeat the experiments and compare and analyze the information obtained.The reason for this is that any statement or sentence that claims to have the infallible seal of scientific quality must be able to be refuted or demonstrated by someone outside the project.

Would anyone believe a doctor who claims to have found the gift of immortality without giving the option to others to check if he is right? In a way it is a matter of common sense.

The role of the media

The media play an important role in the development of science.. When television, for example, tells us that some researchers at a university have discovered something, what they really want to express (perhaps not very pedagogically) is that this research is far from being finished, because their conclusions must be subject to repeated verifications before they can be accepted.

It is at this point that other colleagues in the profession must check the accuracy of such claims. After a thorough screening and proper refereeing, if the study is still valid, the empirical evidence in favor of the hypothesis that has been put forward will be considered to be robust and to explain a phenomenon well.

In this way, mankind will have advanced a step further. This step may have to be reviewed in the future in order to continue advancing, since the scientific method always leaves the door open to a reformulation of theories; otherwise, it would be falling into dogma.

Pseudosciences, sciences that are not really pseudosciences

Unfortunately, sometimes we fall into the error of elaborating pseudoscientific hypotheses, which, as they stand, are not really sciences.which, as they are put forward, cannot be worked through the scientific method.

And what is pseudoscience? Pseudoscience is a belief or practice that is presented as science but does not follow a reliable scientific method, ergo it cannot be tested.ergo it cannot be verified. It is usually characterized by ambiguous, contradictory and unspecific statements where the use of fallacies and exaggerations is the order of the day.

In pseudoscience there is a dependence on confirmation but never on refutational evidence, not to mention the unwillingness to collaborate with the scientific community so that it can evaluate the situation. In short, if we already sometimes fall into pseudoscientific propositions unwittingly, imagine what level of development we would have if our knowledge about nature were only based on these kinds of assertions. It is in this comparison that all the value of science lies: in its usefulness..