We have seen that the scientific method involves formulating a hypothesis. There are many ways in which a scientist may arrive at their hypothesis (including serendipity), but probably the most common one is

______________________________________________________– that is, observing that a phenomenon has always occurred that way in the past, and inducing that it will always happen that way in the future. Proving this hypothesis to be true will be the aim of their experimentation during the testing stage.

What could go into the missing part in the paragraph?

To put this in context, let’s say that I am the first scientist to notice that water always boils at the same temperature, 100?C. Using ________________, I suggest the hypothesis that water always boils at 100?C. I then set out to test this hypothesis, and boil water over a period of years, and always arriving at the same conclusion. I submit my findings to a respected journal, my peers check my findings, and my hypothesis is published. No one refutes my idea, and my hypothesis duly becomes a theory. Over time, the theory then becomes _________________.

Which two words could go into the missing parts?

But there is a problem with this way of viewing science. We cannot prove anything with 100% certainty in the natural world, so the purpose of science is not to show that things are ____________, rather that things are _________. If a hypothesis stands up to testing over a long period of time, it is given the term theory.

Which two words could go into the missing parts?

This idea provides us with a convenient definition of a scientific hypothesis: a statement that can be (potentially) falsified. If it is not (potentially) falsifiable, then it isn’t scientific, and belongs to some other field. In the example given above, if I say that water boils at 100?C, this is clearly scientific, as it can be proven false (or true) in an experiment. If I say that the earth was created by God, this clearly isn’t a scientific theory, because there is no way of testing this idea, and proving it to be false (or true).

Then what kind of a statement would "the earth was created by God" be? (please write a terminological adjective here)

The scientist/philosopher who advocated this idea was ___________________ . In the 1960s he challenged what was then the accepted view that science worked along observationalist-inductionist lines – or, reaching conclusions about hypotheses on the basis of previous results, rather than the potential falsifiability of the idea. According to him, nothing that cannot be falsified can be called a scientific hypothesis/theory.

Who is this person?

Some people have criticised his ideas, as it is difficult to show that some theories are false – for example, evolution. Indeed, he said of this:

"Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical ____________________."

However, the idea of falsification being an integral part of a scientific theory is a very useful way of testing the validity of most scientific hypotheses, and separating the ones that have little claim to scientific legitimacy.

What could potentially go into the missing part?

Serendipity is a very peculiar English word, with a very specific meaning. It is a very useful when applied to discoveries in science that have been made ______________ although as Louis Pasteur said, ‘Chance favours the prepared mind.’

Fill in the blank...

The stages of scientific method:

The problem

Hypothesis

__________

Testing

________

Publication

Replication or falsification

_________

Corrections and modifications

Laws

Fill in the blanks...

What does serendipity mean?

Dunn, Michael. How do we acquire knowledge in the natural sciences? (10th May 2013). https://theoryofknowledge.net. https://www.theoryofknowledge.net/areas-of-knowledge/the-natural-sciences/how-do-we-acquire-knowledge-in-the-natural-sciences/ Last accessed: 6th May 2020

• Thank you.

• Danke schön.