A 2000-word natural science paper
Development characteristics and prospects of natural science
Natural science is a big discipline involving all walks of life, and mastering the development law of natural science is the content that natural science researchers must personally understand. This paper looks at natural science from a dialectical point of view, combs the cognitive model of natural science and explores its development law.
Keywords natural science logical thinking non-logical thinking critical thinking
Natural science is a wide range of knowledge, and it is a scientific system formed by cognition and induction of objective laws of things. Its knowledge level and knowledge coverage basically cover all aspects of human society, and understanding its development law and characteristics is the basic knowledge that researchers engaged in natural science must master.
First, the characteristics of natural science
(A) access to natural science
The late Middle Ages was the gestation period of modern natural science. The most outstanding figure at that time,13rd century English philosopher Rogier? Bacon attached great importance to experience and facts. He pointed out: "It is universally acknowledged that we acquire knowledge through three channels, namely authority, rationality and experience; However, when the authority doesn't know the reason of things; Unless the conclusion is confirmed by experience, reason cannot tell whether it is sophistry or argument. " Because of Roger? Bacon proposed and advocated "experimental science", emphasizing that only experimental methods can give scientific reliability.
Francis, a modern British materialist? Bacon further pointed out that one of the most important characteristics of experimental science is to use experiments to increase the accumulation of factual knowledge, and put forward: "Axioms are constructed from feelings and particularities, and then rise continuously and gradually until the most universal axioms are finally drawn." It is this way of thinking that has guided and promoted the development of scientific theory and made pioneering work for the rise and development of modern science.
It can be seen that natural science, as an important part of big science, is still obtained through scientific observation and scientific experiment.
(2) Classification and arrangement of natural sciences
When we gain knowledge through scientific observation and experiment, it is not a scientific law. Generally speaking, the transition from scientific knowledge to scientific laws and theories goes through two stages: intellectual knowledge and rational knowledge.
Intellectual knowledge: As long as scientific knowledge is classified, systematized, analyzed and summarized, it will rise to scientific laws.
Rational understanding: it mainly forms a theoretical system on the basis of scientific generalization, thus reflecting the universal connection of the objective world rather than the other.
In the process of scientific classification, various scientific methods have been developed, which can be roughly divided into: generalized induction (instinctive induction, common sense thinking induction and critical scientific research induction), deduction (based on Aristotle's formal logic syllogism, symbolic process, mathematical logic and axiomatic method) and analogy (two objects are similar or unified in some aspects, and it is inferred that they may be similar in other aspects; Although the logical basis of analogy is not sufficient, it provides important clues for scientific discovery.
These three methods all reflect the way of thinking revealed by science in reasoning-logical thinking, especially deductive method, which can be said to raise the human experience of thinking with natural language to the level of basic thinking rules and methods.
(C) the rationality and fallibility of natural science
Philosopher Brown pointed out that the classical model of the concept of "rationality" has three characteristics: universality, inevitability and regularity. The rationality of science is first manifested in the logical connection between empirical law and theoretical law; Secondly, there is a logical relationship between experience and theoretical laws that supports each other; In addition, the rationality of theoretical laws highlights the revision of some empirical laws; The rationality of scientific laws can be explained by the effectiveness of scientific practice.
In view of the fallibility of science, we learn from Karl, a philosopher of science in the early 20th century. In the Logic of Scientific Discovery, Popper pointed out that truth and error are asymmetric, and no theory can be proved to be correct, but some theories can be proved to be wrong, so science and non-science can be defined. In the field of science, the crucial concept is "proving wrong" or "falsifying", not "proving right".
Second, the question of logic and non-logic
From the above characteristics of natural science, we can see that in the process of understanding natural science, it is always a process of observation, experiment and reasoning.
In the process of reasoning, people generally regard induction as the basic method of scientific hypothesis or scientific theory. With the help of this method, a new system to explain the observed phenomena or the relationship between phenomena is constructed through a large number of experiments. Although it is not reliable enough, it is creative. This is an important method for theoretical discovery. However, it is not omnipotent, and not all scientific theories can be obtained by induction. Einstein once said that the basic concepts in physics should never be discovered by induction.
Deduction, which corresponds to induction, uses general theory to analyze and explain specific things from the general to the individual. Using this method, people need to rely on a universal rule or principle, that is, the conclusion of the derivation is limited by the initial conditions and the premise is correct, so as to ensure the correctness of the derivation. However, it is difficult to deduce new concepts or experiences, because deduction is a process of popularizing and applying universal principles to phenomena. Darwin once summed up his scientific research experience: I must proceed from a large number of facts, not from principles, and I suspect that principles are fallacious (in his view, deduction is unreliable in the field of biology). Therefore, it is not difficult to find that pure deductive logic also has serious defects.
As Barber, a scientific sociologist, analyzed in Science and Social Order, an agreement that emphasizes the role of logic in the process of scientific discovery misses many of the most important things in science, all possible mistakes, the rich imagination of all scientific discoverers, all thoughts on existing discoveries, and all thoughts and methods of seriously exploring the surrounding world. Biologist Ryan? Du bois once wrote in Louis? Pasteur wrote: "The raw materials that make up science are not only scientists' observations, experiments and calculations, but also their impulses, dreams and stupidity. "
Third, look at the development of natural science with dialectical views and ways of thinking.
From the creative point of view, the process of scientific discovery is the process of interaction between consciousness and subconscious, logic and illogical. When problems arise, researchers will have a "subjective simulation" process. They will subjectively imagine the things around them, pay attention to some specific phenomena, get the expression by subjective speculation, then describe their findings and ideas in scientific language, form a real scientific hypothesis, and then pass the strict scientific methodology test.
In addition, the process of scientific discovery is revolutionary and gradual. That is what we often say: "break and stand." Einstein also pointed out: "It is often more important to ask a question than to solve it. Because solving problems may be just a mathematical or experimental skill, it takes creative imagination to put forward new problems, new possibilities and look at old problems from a new perspective, which marks the real progress of science. " Tingdahl, a scientist, said that once knowledge is acquired, it will cast a faint light around you. Once a major scientific discovery is made, successful scientists will immediately observe it from a possible angle and link it with other knowledge systems to find new ways of scientific research.
Four, several common ways of thinking in natural science
In the final analysis, natural science research is an ideological activity that constantly tests the knowledge and principles on which predecessors' thoughts and actions are based, and organized critical thinking is the basic feature of science.
"Bold ideas, unconfirmed expectations and speculative thoughts are the only means for us to explain nature, and they are also the only laws and tools for us to grasp nature."
-Popper, philosopher of science
References:
[1] Huang Shunji, Su Yue, Huang. Logic and knowledge innovation. Renmin University of China Press. 2002.
[2] Liu. Introduction to dialectics of nature (second edition). Renmin University of China Press. 2008.
[3] Wu Hongzhi, Zhou Jianwu, Tang Jian. Introduction to informal logic. People's publishing house. 2009。
2000-word natural science papers
On the Relationship between Natural Science and Religion
In fact, science and religion do not run counter to each other, and there is a close relationship between them. People pay more and more attention to the relationship between science and religion. However, it should be admitted that there are essential differences between science and religion. We should analyze the relationship between science and religion on the basis of seeing the difference between science and religion. Religion and science are both antagonistic and unified. Religion cannot be separated from science, and science also needs religion. Today, with great progress in scientific development, we should not abandon religious belief, but give full play to its advantages and develop religion while developing science.
Natural science; Religion; Scientists; Religious belief
1 Understanding the definition of science and religion
1. 1 What is science?
Science is a branch of science and a branch theory about the objective laws of nature, society and thinking. In Ci Hai (version 1979), "science" is defined as a knowledge system about nature, society and thinking that is produced and developed to meet the needs of people's production struggle and class struggle, and is the crystallization of people's practical experience. Bernard, a British scholar, said in his book Science in History: "Science can be used as an organizational system; A method; Accumulated knowledge tradition; The main factors to maintain or develop production; It is also one of the most powerful forces that constitute our beliefs and attitudes towards the universe and mankind. " [ 1]
1.2 What is religion?
Religion is a cultural phenomenon produced by the development of human society to a certain historical stage, which belongs to the category of social ideology and is the worship and worship of gods. Generally speaking, religion is a belief system and an explanation of objective existence, which generally includes two aspects: ritual compliance and belief. The main feature of religion is to believe that there is a mysterious power or an entity with magical power outside the real world. This mysterious force not only controls everything, but also dominates the natural evolution, determines the fate of the world, and has absolute authority, thus making human beings awe and worship this mysterious force, and through continuous development and change, it extends belief cognition and ritual activities. Engels' interpretation of religion in Anti-Turin Theory is that "all religions are just reflections of the fantasy of external forces that dominate people's daily lives in people's minds. In this kind of reflection, human power is manifested as superhuman power. "
2 the relationship between science and religion
2. 1 Science and religion grow together.
Science is a cognitive activity, scientific knowledge originates from human social practice, and ancient civilization has created conditions for the development of modern science. Due to the limitation of human social practice and cognitive level, in the long historical process, ancient scientific knowledge has always relied on natural philosophy full of imagination and speculation, and even attached to religious gods. In the Middle Ages, science gradually developed into a branch of theology. With the development of human practice and understanding, science and religion have moved from mixed state to disintegration, and science has finally separated from natural philosophy and religious mythology and evolved into empirical science. 1543, Copernicus's theory of celestial bodies declared the ultimate break between modern science and religious mythology for the first time. Since then, the development of science has made great progress, natural science has also been liberated from religious theology, and science and religion have embarked on the road of conflict and opposition.
At the beginning of human civilization, science and religion sprouted separately. But at that time, both scientific understanding and religious thought were in the primary stage, and they all existed in the primitive thinking form of human beings. They are integrated and infiltrated with each other, so it is difficult to find the difference between them. With the continuous development of productive forces, cultural forms are divided and different cultural forms begin to separate. Before the end of primitive society, the differentiation of different cultures was in a low stage, and scientific knowledge and religious gods still coexisted, with unclear boundaries and mutual tolerance. Because of this, we can see the shadow of mysterious and illusory knowledge in the original science, and we can also find the experience and knowledge accumulated by human beings through practice in the original religion.
2.2 Science and religion are essentially opposites.
Science and religion are essentially opposites. Science does not recognize supernatural forces and opposes using supernatural factors and forces to explain any natural objective phenomena and the development process of natural phenomena. But religion is essentially the worship and envelope of supernatural power, and believes that the world is created by supernatural gods and gods. Religion denies the inevitability of objective existence and the law of the development of objective things because of its worship and worship of supernatural forces. The opposition between science's denial of supernatural power and religion's affirmation of supernatural power determines that science and religion are essentially antagonistic, and this opposition is irreconcilable.
The cognitive styles of science and religion are also completely different. Starting from various concrete forms of objective reality, natural science looks for the connection between objective reality and proves it with experience. The method of religious cognition is "belief doctrine", which relies on non-experience and irrational mysticism intuition.
The social functions of science and religion are also very different. The rapid development of science and technology has promoted the development of social productive forces, thus promoting the continuous development and progress of society. Science is regarded by Marxism as the most significant revolutionary force. Although religion has played a positive role in social development under the special historical background, it is a hidden component in the whole historical process, because religion often shows the objective social system as the performance of God's will, thus hindering social development.
2.3 the conflict between science and religion
Engels said in the introduction of Dialectics of Nature: "Natural science itself is completely revolutionary, and it has to fight for its right to exist." For example, "natural science sent its martyrs to the burning earth and the prison of the inquisition." It is worth noting that Protestants have persecuted the free research of natural science more than Catholics. When Servit was about to discover the process of blood circulation, Calvin burned him to death and roasted him alive for two hours. The Inquisition just took Giordano? Bruno will be satisfied as long as he is burned to death. " [3]
Religion and science have always been in conflict, but the relationship between them has not developed to the point of life and death. Einstein once said: The main source of the conflict between religion and science lies in the concept of personifying God. This symbolic content may conflict with science. As long as the concept of religion contains its unchangeable dogmatic statement of topics that originally belonged to the scientific field, such conflicts will certainly occur. [2] In the whole historical process, the opposition between science and religion is not uncommon, from which we can see that religion interferes with the development of science. For example, the church severely opposed the revolutionary struggle between Galileo and Darwin and brutally persecuted them.
History and reality have proved to us that religion will never give up the challenge to scientific theories that threaten its status. Not only that, religion will attack science education. The most typical example is that, as we all know, _ _ has never stopped attacking "evolution", because "evolution" has attacked Christ _ _, which also staged the persecution of science by religion. From this point of view, the conflict between science and religion has a long history and is difficult to reconcile.
3 The relationship between scientists and religious beliefs Although science and religion have been in conflict in the historical process, many natural scientists in the West have religious beliefs. For example, Kepler, the founder of astrophysics, once said: "Since astronomers are the priests of the highest god in the book of nature, it is not the glory of our wisdom that suits us to think, but the glory of God above all else." ; Newton, the founder of the classical mechanical system, believed in Jesus Christ and Savior. In his later years, he wrote a large number of manuscripts on religious methods, involving chronology and biblical research, and extended them to theological interpretation. Faraday, who developed the basic concepts of electricity and magnetism, is also a devout believer and actively participates in church activities; Dalton, known as the father of atomic theory, is also a tradition.
__
Engels said: "God's experience with natural scientists who believe in God is worse than anywhere else. Materialists only explain things and ignore such nonsense. Only when pestering Christians impose God on them will they consider this matter and give a simple answer, or say as Laplace did:? Your majesty, I didn't? Or more rudely, Dutch businessmen often send away German businessmen who sell them inferior goods in this way. I don't need that thing, okay? This solves the problem. And what God has endured on his defenders! In the history of modern natural science, the experience of God and his defenders is like Friedrich in the Battle of Jena. William III is with his civilian general. With the progress of science, one army after another laid down their weapons and handed over one fortress after another. Until the end, the endless fields of nature were conquered by science, leaving no place for the creator. Newton still put it? First push? Leave it to God, but he is not allowed to interfere in his own solar system. Father Sage praised God by performing all the rituals in the canon, but this did not make him weak. He completely expelled God from the solar system, leaving the latter to do something in the primitive nebula. Create action? . This is true in all fields. " [3]
Engels' words aroused our deep thought. Can a scientist with religious beliefs conduct scientific research? So if he is engaged in scientific research, is his scientific achievement the result of his religious belief or his own thinking?
The author believes that we should adhere to a moderate principle and have faith to prevent going too far. Galileo, for example, can be said that he has always been a loyal Catholic, but it must be admitted that he has a high scientific literacy. Galileo made scientific achievements by pursuing truth. When there was a contradiction between his scientific research and his religious belief, he chose the truth, had lofty scientific spirit and respected scientific facts, so he could make achievements in the field of science.
If scientists are superstitious, their road to science will be full of rugged, and religious beliefs may lead them to the opposite side of science and draw some conclusions that violate science. Here we take Newton as a typical example to investigate. Newton is one of the greatest scientists in modern times. His Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy is recognized as the greatest natural science work in the history of science and has made extraordinary contributions to astronomy and mathematics. These achievements are attributed to his lofty scientific spirit and scientific accomplishment, because he can face scientific facts correctly and dare to break the shackles of religious beliefs. But in his later years, his scientific view gradually succumbed to theological view, and changed from materialistic empiricism to idealistic transcendentalism. After that, Newton didn't make much scientific achievements. It can be seen that scientists can have faith, but they should be moderate.
4 conclusion
Science and religion do not run counter to each other, they are closely related. People pay more and more attention to the relationship between science and religion. However, it should be admitted that there are essential differences between science and religion. Historically, there have been conflicts between science and religion. Religion persecuted science and hindered its development. At the same time, we should analyze the relationship between science and religion on the basis of seeing the difference between science and religion. Religion and science are both antagonistic and unified. Religion cannot be separated from science, and science also needs religion. Today, with great progress in scientific development, we should not abandon religious belief, but give full play to its powerful side and develop religion while developing science.
refer to
Bernard. Science in history [M]. Translated by Wu Guangfu and others. Science Press, 195.
[2] Colected Works of Einstein: Volume I [M].
[3] Engels. Dialectics of Nature [M]// Complete Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 9. People's Publishing House, 2009