Reply to comment

I enjoyed the discussion in class on Thursday. Even though I'm a very science oriented person and was somewhat frustrated when Professor Grobstein questioned why he wasn't walking "down" if the Earth is round, I still appreciated the fact that he was asking questions and getting us to think about looking at facts/assumptions more abstractly. I hadn't really thought about the idea that a hypothesis or theory could never be "true." However, after class on Thursday and further thought, it makes perfect sense that something could never be "true." If something was true, then that would mean that this belief or theory would never have the opportunity to change/develop/advance. Because science is always changing and growing, it is necessary that things not be "true", which could mean they would remain the same forever. This leads well into the idea that things can be proven false, or not true, which then leads to development in science. For example, as I had learned in cognitive neuroscience earlier that same day, centuries ago people believed the heart to be the center for the mind and soul. However, after further analysis and experimenting, they eventually came to realize this theory was not true. This came around because, as discussed in class, a new observation disproved the previous summary of observations. In this case, being wrong led to a greater understanding of the human body and eventually led to the theory that the brain was the location of the mind.