Science

Question 1

Outline and explain two
criticisms of the view that
science is an open
system [10 marks]

Answer 1

One criticism suggests that science cannot be an open system
due to the presence of a paradigm. The paradigm is a shared
set of norms and values for scientists. This is supported by
Kuhn, he argues that the natural sciences are based on a set of
shared assumptions known as the paradigm. This means that
there is a set agenda for scientists to follow. This suggests that
there are measures of what is deemed ‘appropriate’ and
“inappropriate’. This implies that science is a controlled system
This indicates that anyone who steps outside of the shared
paradigm will be excluded from the scientific community. Thus,
science is not open but closed.

Another criticism suggests that scientific knowledge is socially
constructed. This may mean that scientific knowledge is not
objective but actually subjective. For example, Knorr-Cetina
argues that the invention of new scientific notions construct
new facts. Furthermore, experimenting within laboratories
provides an artificial environment. This suggests that it is far
removed from the natural world. Consequently, the results
given are likely to be artificial rather than a true depiction of
reality, thus it is a closed system as it does not consider real
environments.

Question 2

Outline and explain two
was in which religious
interpretations of the
world might differ from
scientific ones [10 marks]

Answer 2

One way in which scientific interpretations differ from religious
interpretations is due to open and closed belief systems.
Science is believed to be an open belief system. According to
Popper, the process of scientists critically scrutinising findings
of other scientists is fundamental to the scientific method. This
means that that data collected by scientists are open to testing
by others. This suggests that research findings can be
criticised. As a result, scientific knowledge can be validated by
undergoing critical scrutiny. In contrast, religious
interpretations are governed by a closed belief system. This
means that religious knowledge is generally regarded as
sacred. Thus it should be accepted rather than challenged.
Therefore, religious and scientific interpretations differ on the
basis of being open to scrutiny.

Another way in which scientific interpretations differ from
religious interpretations is through empirical research
opposed to supernatural beliefs. Science tends to concern
itself with the natural or physical world that can be observed
and measured empirically. For example, Merton’s CUDOs
norms suggest that scientific knowledge is judged by a
universal, objective criteria (such as testing). This suggests that
scientific knowledge is gained through systematic methods
involving a universally understood hypothesis. This implies that
experiments are standardised procedures of data collection,
so that other scientists can repeat the same experiment to
verify data and compare against the hypothesis. Thus allowing
a process of meticulous measuring. Whereas, religious
interpretations are based on spiritual aspects which cannot be
measured. This indicates that the existence of God cannot be
verified empirically. Thereby suggesting that believing in God
is a matter of faith. Consequently, any knowledge claims made
by religion are not verifiable by empirical observations.
Therefore, both interpretations differ on the basis of reliance
on data and empirical methods.