From Science to Philosophy
The Necessary Aims of the Philosophy of Science
Other philosophers of science generally focus on the methodology of science, and are not concerned with issues like the duties of science and the scientist; there is, however, much more in the philosophy of science. Philosophers concerning science should take value-based issues into consideration, and determine the role of science in man's evolutional life. In other words, the philosophy of science should not ignore the relationship between science with man's life and the mission it has regarding human evolution.
If the philosophy of science is to move toward the development of human knowledge, it should undertake these duties:
1-The philosophy of science should express the necessity of the proportionate relationship between the cause and the claim.
Unfortunately, some scientists, particularly in the humanities, do not present suitable reasons for their claims, for example when an intellectual claims that "man is evil by nature" or "man is pure good by nature" merely by observing human behavior. If the scholars of the humanities expressed the reasons for their claims clearly and properly, man would never have to name the twentieth century 'The Century of Alienation from Himself and Others,' nor would he become a tooth of rigidly cold machinery with all the emotions, aesthetics and humanitarian tendencies he possesses.
2-The philosophy of science must take any measures necessary to avoid proving facts by means of statistics. Statistical proof and deduction in scientific theorems needs careful evaluation. Statistical studies can sometimes shows us an aspect of a phenomenon, but it should be never considered as a form of absolute discovery. Statistics cannot identify a phenomenon from various points of view.
3-The philosophy of science should make scientists realize that they should consider science like rays that first light up the insides of the scientists, then light up the whole society. In other words, the philosophy of science is to remind scientists that science consists of two values:
a)Science is innately brightly illuminated, and can enlighten man up too, so it is innately valuable.
b)It also has value as a means; it can be used on the path of human life, which can be quite suitable and advantageous, too.
4-The philosophy of science should reduce man's playfulness and pretension concerning cognitive factors, like his senses, laboratory tools and any device that can help man make contact with facts.
5-By discovering the relationship between various fields of science and presenting general viewpoints on ideologies, the philosophy of science can save researchers from being trapped in the vicious circles of their own fields, and make them seek the fundamental goals of life.
In other words, the philosophy of science should make researchers understand that although they may be experts in their own particular field, they may know little about the domains beyond it, especially the fundamentals and aim of life.
6-Though presenting methods of discovering facts in science is quite difficult, here is how the philosophy of science can help:
a)Showing how to think correctly.
b)Evaluating entirely theorems that are presented to researchers in form of theories.
c)Freeing researchers from inadvertent reliance on predefined principles.
7-Determining the importance and criterion for preferring various branches of science to one another. The philosophy should prove that sciences are not equally important, and some may be preferred to others. The philosophy of science can identify the criterion by means of vast research and study. The criteria should be the intelligible life of human beings.
8-Research on the philosophical origins and basics of each branch of science and discovering their inter-relationships in order to discover the greater unity of sciences.
9-"Revising continually the principles and laws of science and nature and their corresponding tools," the primary factor of which is establishing a free relationship with the concerned principles and laws; in other words, accepting them should not be as sacred as believing in divine rules, so that man might feel free to put them to use at his wish. The philosophy of science should on one hand provide the crucial necessity to constantly revise scientific laws and theories and on the other hand show acceptable, mental methods for the revision. This does not mean, however, that there is no fixed scientific law; what it means is that there should be a modernist approach to various scientific principles if different aspects of issues are to be considered. The point that is of high significance and calls for complete awareness and care is that even the mental aspects of science and knowledge – which are considered as unchangeably correct – need continual reconsideration; they must be exposed to the latest information and discoveries every day, as if we were discovering them again and again, for as we said, most scientific and industrial discoveries are caused by the modernist dynamism and mental endeavor of thinkers who thought the principles and laws of their times should have been revised.