Scientific Thinking in Personal Beliefs

Scientific Thinking in Personal Beliefs

The Fundamental Concept of the Scientific Method

The scientific method refers to a very specific process of deriving conclusions that have a logical basis in empirical facts. In principle, the process of scientific methodology requires that ideas be generated by much more than mere beliefs, conjecture, or even anecdotal observation. That means that observing a specific phenomenon provides, at most, evidence that may be relevant to the formation of a conclusion. However, in order to qualify as a scientific methodology for arriving at any conclusion, the process of deriving that belief must include the following fundamental elements:

The postulation of a formal hypothesis that is capable of being disproved;

A logically valid method of experimentally testing that hypothesis for validity; and

The ability of others to reproduce the same experimental method by similar methodologies.

Scientific Objectivity and Non-scientific Subjectivity

It is easy to have a non-scientific belief, but much harder to maintain a scientific belief. In principle, scientific thinking does not necessarily relate only to matters that are ordinarily considered to be within the real of science. Actually, the scientific method applies to any logical belief. That is because a belief that is not capable of being empirically tested for truth or falsity in connection with the validity of specific postulated hypotheses cannot even be said to be a logical belief. At best, it is merely a description of apparent observations; at worst, it represents nothing more than a subjective belief without any basis in fact or logic. Typical examples of subjective beliefs would include the common beliefs about the existence of Gods.

In that regard, an objective belief about the existence of God (or about anything else) would require that the individual presenting any specific belief as fact be able to distinguish it from alternate beliefs that conflict with that belief. For example, all human societies and cultures maintain their own shared beliefs about what the concept of "God" means to them. In one culture that may mean a single omnipotent consciousness that is aware of human thoughts and behavior and that responds to our wishes and prayers. In another culture, the concept of "God" may refer to something entirely different, such as a multitude of different Gods such as those of the Ancient Greeks. The only way for two individuals with different specific beliefs that are inconsistent with one another to determine who was right would be through scientific testing.

The Affirmative Burden of Logical Proof

Many types of beliefs (including beliefs in Gods) may be incapable of ever being tested empirically. Nevertheless, another more general aspect of scientific reasoning is highly useful in that regard. Namely, the beginning point for any 'scientific" discussion of ideas must be that nothing is true ab initio ("from the start") or a priori ("from the former"). In scientific reasoning, one must always begin any process of analysis with the proverbial "blank slate." That is one reason that many scientists reject the very concept of any "gods." The scientific position (on anything) is always that nothing is true until there is objective evidence of it. Moreover, anything that is fundamentally inconsistent with a specific belief (such as of a "loving") God, necessarily disproves that belief.