Reflecting on our discussions in class, and with inspiration from the TED video, what
distinguishes Natural Science from other AOKs?
Unlike many other AOKs, science is often confirmed by several large groups of people before being accepted as factual. As Naomi Oreskes states, we often ‘fall back’ onto the Natural Sciences as they are viewed as being more factual than any other AOK because they are concerned with the world around us rather than being subjective to human nature, as many of the others are. A problem within this however would be the same as with logic; induction. Many complex theories are formed as a result of an observation, which is then proved with the presence of empirical evidence. However, as with logic, the framework being present to structure the argument does not guarantee its accuracy. It is interesting to see how what is considered as being the most factual of all the AOKs is not necessarily any more reliable than, say, the Arts.