• Question: Science is about systematic analyis and investigation to reach logical conclusions. What is the least scientific thing you have ever done?!

    Asked by samsam to Amy, Andy, Ollie on 23 Jun 2011.
    • Photo: Amy Reeve

      Amy Reeve answered on 23 Jun 2011:

      Hi samsam,

      what an interesting question! it took me ages to think of an answer.

      i think based on your definition the least scientific thing i have ever done was to decide that dressing gown belts would make a good aerial runway from bunkbeds to a wardrobe! Physics and logic did not agree! Made it half way across to have the runway collapse (probably the knots on the belts weren’t tight enough!!) and the wardrobe fall on me! I don’t think we did sufficient investigation of a number of factors!!! I would like to point out that i was only 11 at the time!! 😀

    • Photo: Ollie Russell

      Ollie Russell answered on 23 Jun 2011:

      Hi samsam

      Like Amy, my knowledge of physics when i was little was a bit off…. especially gravity 🙂
      When I was four I decided it would be a good idea to try and balance on a metal railing…. Now, im no gymnast but I thought I was doing a good job. that was until I slipped and gravity took over 🙁

      I woke up an hour later whilst having stiches in my head. I still have the scars to prove it!

    • Photo: Andy MacLeod

      Andy MacLeod answered on 23 Jun 2011:

      Hi samsam. I do unscientific things every day. I believe in all kinds of things that can’t be proved.

      Perhaps the biggest of those is that I believe in an objective reality. I believe there is a world that exists outside of myself. I don’t think that can ever be proved if we’re all stuck inside our own heads.

      Descartes tried. He was a French mathematician and philospher back in the 1600s. He wanted to come up with a new kind of thinking, and used the method of “systematic doubt” – he doubted everything that he could possibly be unsure of. The one solid foundation he found was:”cogito ergo sum” – “I think, therefore I am”. He was able to assert his own existence from his thoughts. He somehow used that to contrive a proof of the existence of god, but I’ve never been quite able to follow that argument.

      One of the ideas he came up with during this process was that of an “evil demon”. Some creature who deliberately misled his senses, causing him to see what wasn’t really there. This idea has recurred throughout the human history – from Plato’s cave to The Matrix and beyond. What our senses percieve may not correspond to what is really there.

      I believe that our sensory inputs represent an accurate description of the real world. But I doubt I’ll be able to prove that. What about you? 🙂

Comments