What makes a good scientific explanation?

What makes a good scientific explanation?

A scientific explanation is a way of explaining something we see in the natural world that’s based on observations and measurements. If all our data is correct and the predictions the explanation makes turns out to be true, then it’s a good scientific explanation.

What are scientific explanations always based on?

Science requires that scientific explanations of phenomena be based on events or mechanisms that can be observed in the natural world. This is how science builds a base of shared observations and ideas to which new knowledge can be added.

What are the 3 parts of a good scientific explanation?

This process is known as evidence-based argumentation. The figure below explains the three components of a scientific argument – the claim (or the explanation), the evidence (or the observations), and the rationale (or the reasoning). Reasoning that explains the evidence and why it supports the claim.

What makes a good explanation philosophy?

The causal-conception can easily account for the three key features of explanation that we have been discussing: Something can be known to occur, without knowing what caused it to occur (knowledge v. understanding); We can know that C was the cause of E without also needing to know what caused C (why regress);

What is scientific and unscientific explanation in logic?

The scientific method is a logically stepped process used for investigating and acquiring or expanding our understanding. Nonscientific methods rely on tradition, personal experience, intuition, logic and authority to arrive at conclusions.

What makes an explanation good?

repetition; humour. All successful explanations have a clear and logical structure to them, using words, images and analogies that pupils understand and well-chosen examples to illustrate key features.

What are the characteristics of a good hypothesis?

A good Hypothesis must possess the following characteristics – 1.It is never formulated in the form of a question. 2.It should be empirically testable, whether it is right or wrong. 3.It should be specific and precise. 4.It should specify variables between which the relationship is to be established.

What are the characteristics of a great scientific argument?

In summary, strong scientific arguments are persuasive and include three critical components: claims, evidence, and reasoning. The quality of these three components strengthens the argument that is answering a scientific question.

What is scientific interpretation?

Interpretation involves constructing a logical scientific argument that explains the data. Scientific interpretations are neither absolute truth nor personal opinion: They are inferences, suggestions, or hypotheses about what the data mean, based on a foundation of scientific knowledge and individual expertise.

What are the criteria for a good explanation?

The explanation should fit the facts to be explained and should not conflict with other facts. When you are explaining an event, you must show why the event should have occurred, and your explanation should not be inconsistent with any facts.

How does a scientific explanation differ from a nonscientific explanation scientific explanations are?

Do good explanations have to be true?

With regard to the Natural Sciences and the Arts, good explanations do not have to reflect the truth. However, good explanations in both subjective and objective contexts must be true, for the extent to which something is true is based on belief while the extent of truthfulness is founded on reason.

Which is an example of a debunked scientific theory?

Perhaps the best known example of a debunked ‘theory’ among physics students is the aether, once thought to be the medium which light propagated through. This theory seemed logical in the late 1800s with the newly developed understanding that light was an electromagnetic wave and the prior knowledge that all other waves propagate through a medium.

Can a well accepted theory of nature be upended?

That is to say, a well accepted ‘theory’ (framework for understanding/predicting nature) can always be upended with sufficiently compelling contrary evidence. That being said, as one progresses in the history of physics towards modern times, examples become harder to come by.

Is the theory of science based on empirical evidence?

On the contrary, science is a framework for interpreting, systematizing, and predicting nature based on empirical observations. That is to say, a well accepted ‘theory’ (framework for understanding/predicting nature) can always be upended with sufficiently compelling contrary evidence.

How is skepticism used in the field of Science?

Skepticism is the act of suspending judgment (the opposite of jumping to conclusions) when evaluating an explanation or claims. It allows scientists to consider all possibilities and systematically question all information in the course of an investigation. How are unicellular and multicellular organisms alike?