natural science assumption
Table of Contents
As a belief/faith system, natural science assume 2 simples rules about knowledge:
- [knowledge is public] The same piece of knowledge should have the same truthfulness no matter where. The world is the same one public object that we all interact with. example of that: In the US or in Australia, the speed of light is 300,000,000 meter/sec, human as we knew it often have 1 heart, force applied to object cause acceleration in a linear manner(\(F = ma\)), and diamond as we knew it have the same physical structure.
- [knowledge can be deterministically expressed and observed] We should be able to give a definite “true or false” answer to every piece of knowledge, and we should be able to observe the phenomenon the knowledge describes in order to do that. for example: “water + jalapenos would cause explosion in 5 minutes” is false, as we could just test it by puting jalapenos into a glass of water, and wait for 5 minutes. On the contrary, “given enough(or rather, infinite time), water + jalapenos would eventually cause explosion” is rather not verifiable, as it would require infinite time. Even “the explosion would happen in 75 years” is testable, and I think there is at least one such experiment in motion.
In addition to those 2 on knowledge, natural science is usually used with basic logic (propositional logic) assumptions and reasoning systems.
Backlinks
Here lists some of my working assumptions. Some of them are hypotheses in natural science sence, and some of them I use as rather primitive assumption that I prioritize along with or before the assumptions of natural science.