FREE ESSAY ON AN ANALYSIS OF PHILOSOPHY AND SCIENCE

AN ANALYSIS OF PHILOSOPHY AND SCIENCE

An Analysis of the Philosophy of Science
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.