1. n What do you expect from Science? n Science is a process, not a thing. n Science is a paradigm based on understanding nature (rather than passively observing it, passing judgment on it, or anthropomorphizing it). n Understanding nature involves reasoning. Thinking Critically about Science

2. n It doesn’t deal with untestable concepts (e.g., absolutes such as good and evil)  They can be observed (felt), but not measured (well, that’s debatable…) n Subjective ways of looking at the world (morals, religion, aesthetics) are not scientific concepts, they are absolutes (truths?): they are based on faith, beliefs, cultural and personal values What Science Isn’t

3. n scientific knowledge is tentative (subject to change) n empirically-based (based on and/or derived from observations of the natural world) n subjective (theory-laden) n necessarily involves human inference, imagination, and creativity (involves the invention of explanations) n and is socially and culturally embedded What Science (probably) is…

4. Assumptions of Science For Science to work, it has to follow certain rules and guidelines which are not questioned: ÜPatterns in the natural world can be understood by careful observation and analysis. Üthe patterns should be repeatable in space and time (they should apply: i.e. Physics!). ÜScience uses Reasoning (makes specific observations and arrives at general conceptualizations  hypotheses). ÜThese generalizations must be testable for falsehood n Yes  you’re good to go n No  go back to the drawing table…

5. State of Science oNew observations can disprove theories or fail to do so (dethronement is our lot)  Dynamic feedback and self-correction oHowever, observations and scientific interpretations of these can never provide truth (no absolute proof of the truth of theories: Changing views and concepts!)  Science models do not necessarily represent reality! oScience is not more procedural than creative!

6. Science and Objectivity n Myth: Scientists are NOT influenced by the social environment (REM: Spock??) n more realistic approach: recognize that we are all influenced, estimate its effect n doesn’t mean fuzzy thinking is acceptable, one must still think critically

7. What are we really comparing? Deduction vs. Induction n Deduction goes from general statements (which may or may not be correct) to account for specific experimental results, (does not require the premises to be true): Swans n Induction (inductive generalizations) goes from specific observations to general statements which can be tested and are accepted as correct until proven wrong.

8. Deductive vs. Inductive Proofs: an example n problem: Deductive reasoning does not require that the initial premises be correct, the final statement is always true humans are the only toolmakers Chimps use tools  Chimps are humans! can lead to false conclusions:

9. error: humans aren’t the only toolmakers! n Rephrasing: If humans are the only toolmakers, and If Chimps use tools, therefore Chimps are humans…  inductive thinking requires that all premises be true (tested by science)  this leads to the concepts of measurement error, uncertainty, and probability

10. n Every measurement is only and approximation! (measurement uncertainties are inevitable) n Any measurement is meaningless unless it is presented with an estimate of its uncertainty (variability) Scientific Proofs Measurement Error!

11. n Scientific observations are always uncertain (not algorithmic!) n Reality: at some level, the original observation is always uncertain (the fewer the observation, the higher the uncertainty). n “Demontrating” something by inductive reasoning only means that it has a high degree of happening again: probability (e.g., sunrise/sunset) n Unfortunately, we may interpret these conclusions as truth (!!!) - And we teach science that way! Scientific Knowledge is Inherently uncertain: Probability

12. Probability: uncertainty n Scientific precision is based on the degree of uncertainty in the original observation. n A conclusion is thus fatally flawed at some level. www.weather.com

13. Accuracy vs. Precision n Accuracy: the degree to which a measurement agrees with an accepted value n Accepted value??? Depends on consensus of measurement takers (example: water freezes at 0 o C) Precision: the degree of exactness to which the measurement is made (e.g., “that’s hot” vs. 100.000 o C  how big is the error bar relative to the value) Precision: the degree of exactness to which the measurement is made (e.g., “that’s hot” vs. 100.000 o C  how big is the error bar relative to the value) n Question: If you measure the temperature of boiling water and find it to be 98.750 o C, are you more or less precise than 100 o C? More accurate??? n Answer: you are more precise, but less accurate

14. Science and Objectivity n Myth: Method of Science is directional (procedural)! n Doesn’t leave any room for serendipity, creativity, and inspiration.

15. Science and Objectivity n Myth: Method of Science is directional! n Doesn’t leave any room for serendipity, creativity, and inspiration. However, you must maintain critical thinking about observations

16. Env. Sciences are basically human!

17. n The overall “picture” is more than just the sum of its components n Env. Science is intrinsically non-reductionist by nature! n The production of a common language (inclusive rather than reductionist) is primordial to the communication of a mutidisciplinary base of knowledge! n Env. Sciences thus need horizontality and verticality! n Decision makers (in Env. Sciences) need the language and the basic understanding to create a dialogue between horizontal and vertical seekers Language of Env. Sciences

18. n The difficulty of Env. Sciences is to manage a partial knowledge of complex systems! n What is complicated vs. complex? n We thus only obtain partial images of complex systems (we try to extrapolate from incomplete knowledge). n Uncertainty leads to “precautionary principle”  Absence of certainty should not retard the adoption of efficient measures to prevent large-scale consequences n Climate Change – Toxic Elements (As, PCB) Language of Env. Sciences