What is science?

Question

What is science?

Answer 1

Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is the effort to discover, understand, or to understand better, how the physical world works, with observable physical evidence as the basis of that understanding. It is done through observation of natural phenomena, and/or through experimentation that tries to simulate natural phenomena under controlled conditions. Knowledge in science is gained through research.

Answer 2

Science is the study of living and non living things around us in this universe.

Answer 3

science is the study of science that deals with the science of sciences

Answer 4

In a very simple term with due context of understanding the exact mean and defination of SCIENCE... please read with precise pertinence to all of the words been gathered here to explian it, illustratively...

SCIENCE is "Organised Body of Knowledge"

at dint and delves of endeavours, efforts, discoveries, searches, researches, and empiricism [ i.e Heuristicism] of.... through the refined steps, as a 'organised process' towards a progressive instrumentational aligning all of polymathic Knowings' in direction of enlightening our doubts, beliefs, faiths, trusts, essences and senses into the stream of reading ourselves been well defined with the principles & laws of Cosmic' Father and Mother' Nature that rules the existences and extant of "All of Consciousness", as nomenclatured hereinbelow...

* KNOWING [ i.e. to awake, to aware and to acquaint ],

* RE-KNOWING [vide varied and allied Tests & Experiments]

* APPROVING...

* ACCREDITING...

* APPLYING...

And on findings been found all within the scope of a particular design and format... then such findings are extrapolated and confirmed as SCIENCE

But, mind it Science is not static... indeed its non-static... it keeps on changing its presentational modes & codes, not because it changes itself ~ but because we keep-on redefining it with the perspective gains & attains of new conceptive Percepts or perceptive Concepts been conferred and bestowed by Time & Tide on us... So, Science is the matter of What yet Known is at its Best, yet undisputable with no parrallel findings.

Hence SCIENCE is but "Organised Body of Knoweldge

Answer 5

Science is the systematic study of nature and how it affects us and our environment.Nature phenomena that happened in our environment can be explained through science.

Answer 6

–noun 1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.  

2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.  

3. any of the branches of natural or physical science.  

4. systematized knowledge in general.  

5. knowledge, as of facts or principles; knowledge gained by systematic study.  

6. a particular branch of knowledge.  

7. skill, esp. reflecting a precise application of facts or principles; proficiency.

Answer 7

hello,

Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is the effort to discover, understand, or to understand better, how the physical world works, with observable physical evidence as the basis of that understanding. It is done through observation of natural phenomena, and/or through experimentation that tries to simulate natural phenomena under controlled conditions. Knowledge in science is gained through research.

history of Science

Well into the eighteenth century, science and natural philosophy were not quite synonymous, but only became so later with the direct use of what would become known formally as the scientific method, which was earlier developed during the Middle Ages and early modern period in Europe and the Middle East (see History of scientific method). Prior to the 18th century, however, the preferred term for the study of nature was natural philosophy, while English speakers most typically referred to the study of the human mind as moral philosophy. By contrast, the word "science" in English was still used in the 17th century to refer to the Aristotelian concept of knowledge which was secure enough to be used as a sure prescription for exactly how to do something. In this differing sense of the two words, the philosopher John Locke in An Essay Concerning Human Understanding wrote that "natural philosophy [the study of nature] is not capable of being made a science".

By the early 1800s, natural philosophy had begun to separate from philosophy, though it often retained a very broad meaning. In many cases, science continued to stand for reliable knowledge about any topic, in the same way it is still used in the broad sense (see the introduction to this article) in modern terms such as library science, political science, and computer science. In the more narrow sense of science, as natural philosophy became linked to an expanding set of well-defined laws (beginning with Galileo's laws, Kepler's laws, and Newton's laws for motion), it became more popular to refer to natural philosophy as natural science. Over the course of the nineteenth century, moreover, there was an increased tendency to associate science with study of the natural world (that is, the non-human world). This move sometimes left the study of human thought and society (what would come to be called social science) in a linguistic limbo by the end of the century and into the next.

Through the 19th century, many English speakers were increasingly differentiating science (meaning a combination of what we now term natural and biological sciences) from all other forms of knowledge in a variety of ways. The now-familiar expression “scientific method,” which refers to the prescriptive part of how to make discoveries in natural philosophy, was almost unused during the early part of the 19th century, but became widespread after the 1870s, though there was rarely totally agreement about just what it entailed. The word "scientist," meant to refer to a systematically-working natural philosopher, (as opposed to an intuitive or empirically-minded one) was coined in 1833 by William Whewell.Discussion of scientists as a special group of people who did science, even if their attributes were up for debate, grew in the last half of the 19th century.Whatever people actually meant by these terms at first, they ultimately depicted science, in the narrow sense of the habitual use of the scientific method and the knowledge derived from it, as something deeply distinguished from all other realms of human endeavor.

By the twentieth century, the modern notion of science as a special brand of information about the world, practiced by a distinct group and pursued through a unique method, was essentially in place. It was used to give legitimacy to a variety of fields through such titles as "scientific" medicine, engineering, advertising, or motherhood.Over the 1900s, links between science and technology also grew increasingly strong.

Distinguished from technology

By the end of the century, it is arguable that technology had even begun to eclipse science as a term of public attention and praise. Scholarly studies of science have begun to refer to "technoscience" rather than science of technology separately. Meanwhile, such fields as biotechnology and nanotechnology are capturing the headlines. One author has suggested that, in the coming century, "science" may fall out of use, to be replaced by technoscience or even by some more exotic label such as "techknowledgy.

philosophy of science

The philosophy of science seeks to understand the nature and justification of scientific knowledge. It has proven difficult to provide a definitive account of the scientific method that can decisively serve to distinguish science from non-science. Thus there are legitimate arguments about exactly where the borders are, leading to the problem of demarcation. There is nonetheless a set of core precepts that have broad consensus among published philosophers of science and within the scientific community at large.

Science is reasoned-based analysis of sensation upon our awareness. As such, the scientific method cannot deduce anything about the realm of reality that is beyond what is observable by existing or theoretical means.[14] When a manifestation of our reality previously considered supernatural is understood in the terms of causes and consequences, it acquires a scientific explanation.[15]

Some of the findings of science can be very counter-intuitive. Atomic theory, for example, implies that a granite boulder which appears a heavy, hard, solid, grey object is actually a combination of subatomic particles with none of these properties, moving very rapidly in space where the mass is concentrated in a very small fraction of the total volume. Many of humanity's preconceived notions about the workings of the universe have been challenged by new scientific discoveries. Quantum mechanics, particularly, examines phenomena that seem to defy our most basic postulates about causality and fundamental understanding of the world around us. Science is the branch of knowledge dealing with people and the understanding we have of our environment and how it works.

There are different schools of thought in the philosophy of scientific method. Methodological naturalism maintains that scientific investigation must adhere to empirical study and independent verification as a process for properly developing and evaluating natural explanations for observable phenomena. Methodological naturalism, therefore, rejects supernatural explanations, arguments from authority and biased observational studies. Critical rationalism instead holds that unbiased observation is not possible and a demarcation between natural and supernatural explanations is arbitrary; it instead proposes falsifiability as the landmark of empirical theories and falsification as the universal empirical method. Critical rationalism argues for the ability of science to increase the scope of testable knowledge, but at the same time against its authority, by emphasizing its inherent fallibility. It proposes that science should be content with the rational elimination of errors in its theories, not in seeking for their verification (such as claiming certain or probable proof or disproof; both the proposal and falsification of a theory are only of methodological, conjectural, and tentative character in critical rationalism). Instrumentalism rejects the concept of truth and emphasizes merely the utility of theories as instruments for explaining and predicting phenomena.

bye...

Answer 8

Darn you and your question! Now i'm confused!!! :P