| Science has become the standard for determining truth and producing knowledge. This has happened alongside the diminishing value of traditions and common sense as sources of knowledge. That is, science has become the benchmark for knowledge at the expense of other possible means. The fact that science has taken such a prominent position regarding knowledge is interesting when one considers the weaknesses of the realist position in the philosophy of science. By 'realism' I mean the belief that scientific theories are true, or at least approximately true. I begin by discussing arguments both for and against scientific realism, I conclude that science is a non-realist enterprise and that while useful in helping us understand the world, calling the theories of science 'true' is not a safe risk. Finally, since science is the standard for knowledge, I present a theory on the implications of this view for knowledge in general. |
