"Scientific theories, which most people consider as fact, almost invariably prove to be inaccurate. Thus one should look upon any information described as ’factual’ with skepticism since it may well be proven false in the future."
The ongoing scientific research in the various fields produces vast amounts of new information, ranging from novel theories to detailed descriptions of a particular, if not esoteric scope. Although not any piece of information should be unquestionably accepted, scientific publications, in general, should be treated positively, rather than with suspicion and skepticism. Such an attitude reflects an accurate understanding of both the essence of science and the way it generates knowledge.
Modern science is an inductive system, based on constructing theories and testing them empirically. The conduct of the second, empirical phase is seemingly paradoxical: a scientist can refute a theory if it is contradicted by the evidence, but he can never actually prove that the theory is veracious since he can never rule out the possibility that such contradicting evidence would never appear in the future. Refusing to accept a credible scientific theory because it may prove to be inaccurate is thus like refusing to drive a car because something might go wrong. Yes, something might go wrong, but you should somehow reach your destination.
In evaluating any theory, one should keep in mind that modern scientific research, unlike its ancient predecessors, is subject to rigorous rules and procedures, and is conducted in a relatively competitive environment that punishes bad research. Lending credit to scientific articles, at least those published in respected journals, is not a vice, therefore, but rather a humble recognition of one's limited knowledge and a show of respect to those who have obtained this knowledge in a prolonged, demanding process.
It should be taken for granted that like all other human beings, scientists do make mistakes. After all, modern research subsumes a vast range of highly complicated topics, themes, and ideas, and there exists a certain limit to one's ability to always get it right. In some cases, when a piece of information seems absurd, one should rather treat it with healthy skepticism, though not outrightly reject it. However, suspecting any scientific theory as a general rule, even if there exists a handful of evidence supporting it, is an obdurate, if not harmful attitude.
For sure, scientific research is never flawless, sometimes one can hardly call it outstanding. Accepting scientific research is nevertheless vital for any society since it allows society to solve various problems and ameliorate living standards. In such cases, good, if not excellent, results, is just what we need.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-02 | Mateo Chen | 83 | view |
| 2021-11-04 | Tabellini22 | 83 | view |
| 2021-08-27 | wootwoot | 66 | view |
| 2020-11-18 | bubble tea | 66 | view |
| 2020-09-26 | Tabassum Zaman | 58 | view |
- Scientific theories which most people consider as fact almost invariably prove to be inaccurate Thus one should look upon any information described as factual with skepticism since it may well be proven false in the future 83
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected However since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations we cannot permit i 66
- The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals In a controlled laboratory study of liquid hand soaps a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful bacter 85
- All too often companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees such consultants would be unnecessary 66
- The following is a letter that recently appeared in the Oak City Gazette a local newspaper The primary function of the Committee for a Better Oak City is to advise the city government on how to make the best use of the city s limited budget However at som 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 229, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...as, and there exists a certain limit to ones ability to always get it right. In some...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, thus, after all, at least, in general, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 58.6224719101 73% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2156.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 397.0 442.535393258 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.43073047859 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46372701284 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05470015151 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.599496221662 0.4932671777 122% => OK
syllable_count: 676.8 704.065955056 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 6.24550561798 16% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.6193100656 60.3974514979 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.75 118.986275619 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8125 23.4991977007 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.625 5.21951772744 146% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.218473004656 0.243740707755 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0647181208125 0.0831039109588 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0579219376021 0.0758088955206 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113421679348 0.150359130593 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0365344927416 0.0667264976115 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.51 12.1639044944 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.96 8.38706741573 119% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 100.480337079 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.8971910112 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.