Accept A Natural Or Human Science Claim Philosophy Essay

Taking into account the different methods of justification to what extent can we accept a natural or human science claim with the evidence being provided being reliable/unreliable or the claim being dismissed without the provision of evidence.

Perception and reasoning play a key role in human sciences and natural sciences, especially when it comes to accepting or dismissing a claim with or without the provision of evidence.

Evidence is the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid. Evidence is essentially climacteric when it comes to proving a science claim, however do we perceive the evidence provided in natural sciences to be equal to the evidence provided in human sciences?

Natural sciences are sciences that deal with the physical world such as Biology. As a Biology student, Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution really intrigued me as well as the bacteria resistant to antibiotics. There are certain types of bacteria that cause diseases and patients with bacterial infections are generally treated with antibiotics. In a large population of bacteria, some may carry the gene of resistance to antibiotics and overtime the bacteria with this gene are more likely to survive and pass on their antibiotic resistant gene because of evolution. The evidence is the bacteria with this gene itself and how it has increased in number over time.

Another example of Evolution is Charles Darwin’s Theory Of Evolution. This theory focuses on the point that the congruity and intricacy of nature can be explained by mentioning that complex species have evolved over long periods of time to fit in with their environment more in the terms of survival of the fittest. The evidence behind this lies in the perception of organisms. After examining several generations of the same species like the species "Galapagos Finches" it was noticeable that they had evolved over time as their seemed to be 13 types of "Galapagos Finches" which were alike in all ways except that they had different beaks. This was due to their diet as well as changes in their environment leading to them evolving to be better adapted to their environment to ensure their survival. The evidence is in the changes of their beak shapes and those who believe in Charles Darwin’s theory of Evolution are generally referred to as evolutionists. However this idea usually clashes with the creationist’s point of view, which occurs in the human sciences.

Human sciences are the sciences that deal with the study and interpretation of the experiences, activities and artifacts associated with human beings. One of the fields is social sciences in which anthropology seems to be quiet a fascinating field especially the cultural aspect of it. There are many cultures that are based on many different religions around the world. Many people who strongly believe in religion depending on their culture, believe in the existence of a divine being or divine beings like in my religion, I believe in a single divine being who I believe is the creator of the universe including all that exists.

The people who believe in this as well as prefer the theory that a divine being is the reason that species have changed over time as compared to evolutionists who believe in Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, the opposers are referred to as creationists. However, unlike Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution there is no strong visual evidence of any divine beings to support the statement of the existence of divine beings. Creationists rely on secondary resources for information like holy texts such as the Torah, Quran and Bible for their information on divine beings and ways of life. Creationists are generally people who believe strongly in religion and they believe that organisms have adapted over time not due to evolution, but due to divine beings.

Creationists are generally opposed to evolutionists due to the fact that religions gives answers to questions that justify the existence of divine beings that cannot otherwise be proven scientifically. Religion provides logical answers to difficult questions giving people hope. It provides a fulfilling explanation as it solves problems of the origins of species as well as, as to why they have changed over time and it guarantees that life is significant and has meaning. The reason why creationists strongly believe in the existence of divine beings is because most people would rather have faith and believe that a divine created us being as part of a divine plan then rather be viewed as an accident in a pointless universe.

So the evidence provided in natural sciences and in human sciences are not equal but different and are presented differently, both have truth behind them but different versions of truth. There are two different types of truth, which exist in unison, which is known as the "Hard truths" and the "Soft truths". The hard truths fall into the realms of the natural sciences category, this is because these truths are facts that are accepted universally and have strong evidence to prove that they are accurate like with Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. Then comes the "Soft truths" which falls into the realms of the human sciences, as they are known as the universal truths such as the existence of divine beings. Soft truths also rely heavily on beliefs and personal views like opinions of religions. Since they are opinions they can be referred to as soft truths as it depends on the individual’s opinion. The truth varies depending on a persons views and beliefs. The truth tends to vary from individual to individual and also whether they are a creationist or evolutionist.

As for evidence creationists tend to rely on religious texts and fossils from the past. It is unknown how reliable these sources of evidence are, for all we know they could be the full truth, half-truth or we may never even know? However the reasoning behind it seems significant to people and their emotions contribute to their ideologies. I learn about my culture and read religious texts to learn more and gain information about the divine being in my religion. As for evolutionists they tend to rely on factual evidence. Like in Biology when a knowledge claim is made strong evidence is needed to prove that it is right, experiments are done and calculations are performed to prove the final conclusion and when this is done the knowledge claim is accepted however when a knowledge claim is not supported by strong evidence, unreliable evidence or not even backed up by any evidence at all the knowledge claim is dismissed with no second thought given to it unlike the evidence in human sciences which even without evidence the knowledge claim is accepted.

I do believe that in both sciences knowledge claims can be made, however in natural sciences a strong source of evidence is required to support the knowledge claim so that it can be accepted whereas in human sciences strong evidence is not required and even without any evidence a knowledge claim can be accepted. As for the evidence provided in creationism and evolutionism it really depends on the individuals personal interpretation. There are some people who believe strongly in creationism as well as evolutionism as well. My personal interpretation is that I believe that it is possible to believe in both creationism as well as evolution. I believe that the universe as well as organisms were created by a divine being and this divine being has created many new organisms over long periods of time how ever significant changes in a species over time, I believe is due to evolution, it is due to the changes in the species environment and diet. It is possible to believe in both ideologies.