In my analysis of the philosophy of science, I will attempt to give an analysis
of Aristotle’s demonstration and scientific knowledge starting points and how
they apply to his theory, his definition in sciences, and scientific enquires of
the various questions posted as well as his ideals of explanation, which gives
clear ideal of his theory points in his premises. Aristotle starting points of
sciences are definitions, existence proposition and general logical truth, which
can only be grasped and not demonstrated. They are not verbal but give inner or
essential nature of natural kinds, pertaining to the science. From these stating
points one may deduce valid syllogisms with further characteristics that
necessarily have virtue of essential value, in comparation to Euclid’s
geometry who’s starting points are definitions, postulates and common
principles. Aristotle starting points, which is the axioms- the demonstrated
truths are its propositions that have been proven. In order to acquire such a
scientific knowledge of theorems demonstration must infers its validility from
premises, which are true, necessary and unspurious. We think we possess we
scientific knowledge, when we assume knowledge of the causes. This is not
possible, because having scientific knowledge is being in this condition, and
those who think they have this knowledge are not, but those who do really are.
Which follows that anything of scientific knowledge cannot be otherwise. Nous
(starting -points which are themselves knowable) grasps indemontratible starting
points. Therefore, if scientific knowledge is what we say it is then
demonstrative knowledge depends on premises of truth, which are primitive and
immediate. The conclusion must give the true reasons of facts mentioned.
Aristotle example of this is the nearness of the planets and why they do not
twinkle. He argues that the starting points of demonstration are necessary
because they are truth and demonstration knowledge comes from necessary starting
points. Deductive starting points cannot be proven and do not have to be grasped
– these are called posits. A posit assumes that something is or something is
not, a supposition; without assumption it is a definition. He is insistent in
the usage of appropriate premises and methods of questions under discussuion,
being that one cannot give proof by crossing over from another kind. Aristotle
requirements for the premises of demonstrations have unwelcome consequences,
because scientific laws alone gives no hope of the full explanation of
individual events, being that any full explanation must include facts about
environment and preceding conditions. Aristotle scientific enquiry proceeds that
things in which we seek are those we know, which are the ‘that’, the
‘why’, whether something is, and what is. If knowing a proposition that is
demonstrated involves knowing the demonstration of it then obviously we must
then distinguish two types of knowledge – ‘weak knowledge’ the enquiry,
and ‘ strong knowledge’, the discovery. Which gives confidence that some
proposition is scientifically explicable. The important point being that at any
given stage in scientific progress of laws and connections have provided the
framework, which are guidelines to determine some newly observed conjunction of
events is law-governed. Aristotle’s ideal of explanations leaves us to make
such additions and qualifications that are necessary to accommodate other
essentials qualities of his theory. It seems unlikely to assume that such
departures occur and such masses exits in the in demonstration starting points
of science. In conclusion, it would be wrong to suggest that science is a matter
of explanation, because science is also reasons derived from knowledge. It is
not only concerned with good, but also with what is necessary. Science need
starting points which must be demonstrated in order to provide proven theories.
Nevertheless Aristotle is still venerated in the conscientious role he has
played in defining scientific definition in theory, providing us with many of
those starting points. He is still accredited today for many of his important
ideas and concepts, which has generalized theories of sciences.