On The Objectivity Of Scientific Knowledge

Respecting knowledge is one of the most important characteristics of human. In Latin, it is called scientia, therefore science has become the most respected part of knowledge. But where exactly does the scientific knowledge come from ? How is it distinguished from other empirical knowledge or logical knowledge ? These questions are concerned by lots of people. The question is:what can we do to ensure the objectivity of scientific knowledge? How can we defend the objectivity of scientific theories? In this paper, i attempt to investigate the nature of scientific knowledge trough a historical narrative way?As we all know, we live in the empirical world, our knowledge about the world partly originated from our daily experiences, which is the start of our knowledge. In the history of western philosophy, ether empiricism or rationalism admitted the importance of experience. In my opinion, scientific knowledge is our understanding of the laws of nature, then, what is the relation between our empirical common sense and our scientific knowledge? In the Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, Kant writes that:" There are many laws of nature, which we can only know by means of experience; but conformity to law in the connection of appearances, i.e., in nature in general, we cannot discover by any experience, because experience itself requires laws which are a priori at the basis of its possibility. The possibility of experience in general is therefore at the same time the universal law of nature, and the principles of the experience are the very laws of nature. For we do not know nature but as the totality of appearances, i.e., of representations in us, and hence we can only derive the laws of its connection from the principles of their connection in us, that is, from the conditions of their necessary union in consciousness, which constitutes the possibility of experience, "we can get that Kant thinks experience is very important, it is the inevitable way to obtain scientific knowledge. Then, how dose our daily experience rise to scientific knowledge? For this problem, there were two main paths in the history of philosophy:one school maintains that scientific knowledge is derived from empirical facts, which is founded by Francis Bacon, they emphasize the importance of scientific experiments and the standard of knowledge is its utility;this school developed into positivism and pragmatism; th other school maintain that scientific knowledge can be derived from logical deduction, its main representative is logical positivism, they emphasize the fallibility of experience and pay much attention to logical induction.Basic ideas:start from common sense,and then discuss Inductionism and Falsificationism and find their advantages and disadvantages, last to the Probabilistism .Personally, I think the objectivity of scientific theory of hierarchical argumentation and practical theory of the use of scientific theory, we can through differs in some image science theory objectivity limit listed factors, but, in practical applications, should stick to practical principle, can effectively deal with us in real life problems, and can guide our production theory of life is a good theory.