Science and Subjective Thinking

Science and Subjective Thinking

Many scientists argue that all scientific discoveries ought to be objective to eliminate error, doubt, or failure. They additionally believe that subjectivity is erroneous, but scientific phenomena solve critical concepts that require a high level of accuracy. It is inarguable that many emotional factors control the human mind, hence it is subjective. The subjective perception discovers scientific theories due to curiosity. Furthermore, human beings assess and evaluate the problems the world faces. Therefore they turn to science to solve the issues. The solutions increase efficiency, thus providing happiness to other beings. Furthermore, human beings discover phenomena since they already exist in their minds. Scientific knowledge is proved false or true based on human intuition. It is uncertain to claim that scientific arguments rely solely on objective thinking since the human mind is created to be partly objective and subjective to provide a logical ground in problem-solving.

Human beings ought to be subjective to solve global problems. Scientific knowledge is derived from human needs. Human needs are solely personal, that is, they will be happy if their wants and issues get solutions. For instance, Fritz Haber discovered the Haber process not only due to his expertise in chemistry but also the needs and suffering of his country (“The Haber Process,” n.d.). He was a patriot and believed a scientist should do anything in his capacity to assist their country. He was empathetic to his country and was opinionated that he had the responsibility to aid the country in war. Hence he developed the Haber process to collect nitrogen used in catastrophic bombs and gases. Furthermore, the Haber-Bosch process is has ensured the world has adequate food to satisfy billions of people. It is inarguable that Fritz Haber’s problem-solving subjective nature was crucial in the synthesis of ammonia to reduce famine.

The world receives knowledge from the mind, not the vice versa. The scientific knowledge exists in the human mind long before they are discovered. For instance, it is recorded that Isaac Newton discovered the law of gravity. He sat under a tree, and an apple fell. The external world possessed the illustration and the suggestion of the unknown phenomena, but not the knowledge. Newton was perplexed by the immediate response of a falling object to proceeding to the ground. Newton’s brain was curious since it possessed the knowledge awaiting discovery (Mannan, 2016). Subjectivity entails existing in the inner world(mind) as compared to the external world. Therefore, it is certain to claim that subjective and objective thinking are similarly essential in scientific knowledge.

The human mind decides whether scientific knowledge is true or false based on intuition. There exists no formula or strategy ode discovering scientific concepts. They are found from the imagination; hence, intuition separates speculations from facts. Albert Einstein is one of the scientists who spent most of their time in their imagination. He discovered special relativity through the process and was confident it was true long before he proved it (Bennett, 2014). Einstein believed in intuition more than objectivity. He insisted that intuition, a subjective concept, was crucial in discovering and evaluating scientific knowledge.

Many people insist that scientific knowledge is solely objective due to accuracy and factual nature. However, scientific knowledge is discovered by and exists in the mind. The external world learns from the internal. The mind’s intuitive nature assists the world in discovering and understanding science. Therefore, it is certain to claim that scientific knowledge relies on objective and subjective thinking.

References

Bennett, J. (2014). What Is Relativity?: An Intuitive Introduction to Einstein’s Ideas and Why They Matter. Columbia: Columbia University Press.

Mannan, A. (2016). Science and Subjectivity: Understanding Objectivity of Scientific Knowledge. Philosophy And Progress, 43-72. doi: 10.3329/pp.v59i1-2.36680

The Haber Process. Retrieved 25 November 2019, from http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/~paulmay/haber/haber.htm