Are there perspectives in science? Yes — in almost every field. accepts this as normal; the view treats it as unfinished business. Case study: — light behaves as wave or particle depending on the experiment.
(Popper): scientists should try to falsify hypotheses, not confirm them. The (H₀) is what scientists aim to disprove. Three problems:
Self-refutation — the principle itself is not falsifiable
— hypotheses can’t be tested alone; an can always absorb a falsification
Stubborn theorists — continental drift took until 1960 despite overwhelming 1905 evidence
An doesn’t overthrow theories — the Mendeleev/noble gas case shows scientists modify and extend rather than abandon.
Observation is not innocent: - — you must already know what to look for - observation / — “no immaculate perception” - and — the act of measuring changes the system - — Blondlot’s N-ray scandal - s — H. pylori blocked for decades by the assumption stomachs are too acidic for bacteria
Socio-cultural perspective: systematic exclusion of women and minorities is an epistemological problem, not just an ethical one — it shaped what science asked and what it ignored.
Deeper challenges: - — no finite observations can guarantee a universal claim - — quarks, fields, energy cannot be observed; anti-realists say they don’t exist, realists invoke the no-miracles argument