The Problem of Succession in Scientific Processes

Mehmet Latif Bakış

Makale detayları

The Problem of Succession in Scientific Processes

Yazarlar:

Mehmet Latif Bakış

Yayıncı:

Artvin Çoruh University

Ana Başlıklar:

Dini Araştırmalar (Diğer)

Dergi:

Akademik-Us Issue 14, pp.40-52

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001308748

pISSN:

2587-0750

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 It is accepted that the first step of our knowledge is our experiences. It is accepted that we first experience the physical universe in its dimension that is subject to our senses and observe its functioning. Accor-dingly, it is evaluated that we try to establish logical relationships between events and make consistent inferences based on our observations. Thus, it is aimed to reach more rational and real data about what the truth is or what is real. The experiences in question and the inferences based on these experiences basically manifest as two different views. One of the views is that there is a causal link in the succession of events. This view voices the possibility that if the inference is accepted as correct or its accuracy is determined in person, if the connection between the events is determined, the human mind will be awa-re of the functioning of nature, we will be able to manipulate the chain of events and keep the control in our own hands as a result of scientific studies. The other view is that there is no clear and distinct relati-onship that can be observed in natural processes that operate independently of each other. Accordingly, the reason for establishing a connection between events is that we think that we are obliged to make such an inference based on the fact that natural processes operate continuously and in the same way. This is due to the fact that successive processes either manipulate our minds, force our thoughts to ac-cept them as if they were an illusion, or because we are not sufficient to understand and make sense of a causeless process. However, although mutual dilemmas are expressed in both approaches, but there is no certainty, which one is groundable and sustainable is evaluated according to the principle of logical inference and consistency.

 It is accepted that the first step of our knowledge is our experiences. It is accepted that we first experience the physical universe in its dimension that is subject to our senses and observe its functioning. Accor-dingly, it is evaluated that we try to establish logical relationships between events and make consistent inferences based on our observations. Thus, it is aimed to reach more rational and real data about what the truth is or what is real. The experiences in question and the inferences based on these experiences basically manifest as two different views. One of the views is that there is a causal link in the succession of events. This view voices the possibility that if the inference is accepted as correct or its accuracy is determined in person, if the connection between the events is determined, the human mind will be awa-re of the functioning of nature, we will be able to manipulate the chain of events and keep the control in our own hands as a result of scientific studies. The other view is that there is no clear and distinct relati-onship that can be observed in natural processes that operate independently of each other. Accordingly, the reason for establishing a connection between events is that we think that we are obliged to make such an inference based on the fact that natural processes operate continuously and in the same way. This is due to the fact that successive processes either manipulate our minds, force our thoughts to ac-cept them as if they were an illusion, or because we are not sufficient to understand and make sense of a causeless process. However, although mutual dilemmas are expressed in both approaches, but there is no certainty, which one is groundable and sustainable is evaluated according to the principle of logical inference and consistency.

 It is accepted that the first step of our knowledge is our experiences. It is accepted that we first experience the physical universe in its dimension that is subject to our senses and observe its functioning. Accor-dingly, it is evaluated that we try to establish logical relationships between events and make consistent inferences based on our observations. Thus, it is aimed to reach more rational and real data about what the truth is or what is real. The experiences in question and the inferences based on these experiences basically manifest as two different views. One of the views is that there is a causal link in the succession of events. This view voices the possibility that if the inference is accepted as correct or its accuracy is determined in person, if the connection between the events is determined, the human mind will be awa-re of the functioning of nature, we will be able to manipulate the chain of events and keep the control in our own hands as a result of scientific studies. The other view is that there is no clear and distinct relati-onship that can be observed in natural processes that operate independently of each other. Accordingly, the reason for establishing a connection between events is that we think that we are obliged to make such an inference based on the fact that natural processes operate continuously and in the same way. This is due to the fact that successive processes either manipulate our minds, force our thoughts to ac-cept them as if they were an illusion, or because we are not sufficient to understand and make sense of a causeless process. However, although mutual dilemmas are expressed in both approaches, but there is no certainty, which one is groundable and sustainable is evaluated according to the principle of logical inference and consistency.

 Bilgilerimizin ilk basamağının deneyimlemelerimiz olduğu kabul edilmektedir. İlk olarak duyularımıza konu olan boyutuyla fizik evreni deneyimlediğimiz, ondaki işleyişi gözlemlediğimiz kabul edilmektedir. Buna göre, gözlemlerimizden hareketle olaylar arasında mantıklı ilişkiler kurup tutarlı çıkarımlar yapmaya çalıştığımız değerlendirilmektedir. Böylece gerçeğin ne olduğuna veya neyin gerçek olduğuna dair daha rasyonel ve reel verilere ulaşılması hedeflenmektedir. Söz konusu deneyimlemeler ve deneyimlere konu olan çıkarımlar temelde iki farklı görüş şeklinde tezahür etmektedir. Görüşlerden biri, olayların birbirinin ardı ardına gerçekleşmelerinde bir nedensellik bağının olduğu yönündedir. Bu görüş, çıkarımın doğru kabul edilmesi veya bizzat doğruluğunun tespit edilmesi halinde, olaylar arasındaki bağın tespit edilmesi durumunda insan aklının tabiatın işleyişine vakıf olmasını, olaylar zincirini manipüle edip bilimsel çalışmalar neticesinde kontrolü kendi elimizde tutabileceğimize dair bir olasılığı seslendirmektedir. Diğer görüş ise aslında birbirlerinden bağımsız olarak doğal işleyen süreçlerde gözlemlenebilen açık ve seçik bir ilişkinin var olmadığı yönündedir. Buna göre ise olaylar arasında bir bağın kurulmasının nedeni, tabii süreçlerin sürekli ve aynı şekilde işlemesinden hareketle böyle bir çıkarımı yapmaya mecbur olduğumuzu düşünmemizdir. Bu da art arda gelişen süreçlerin ya zihnimizi manipüle etmesinden ya düşüncelerimizi bir illüzyona sürükler gibi kendisini öyleymiş gibi kabul ettirmesinden ya da bizim nedensiz bir işleyişi anlama ve anlamlandırmada yeterli olmayışımızdan kaynaklanmaktadır. Ancak her iki yaklaşım şeklinde de karşılıklı açmazların seslendirildiği, fakat bir kesinlik bilgisi söz konusu olmamasına rağmen hangisinin temellendirilebilir ve sürdürülebilir olduğu mantıksal çıkarım ve tutarlılık ilkesine göre değerlendirilmektedir.

Makale detayları

The Problem of Succession in Scientific Processes

Yazarlar:

Mehmet Latif Bakış

Yayıncı:

Artvin Çoruh University

Ana Başlıklar:

Dini Araştırmalar (Diğer)

Dergi:

Akademik-Us Issue 14, pp.40-52

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001308748

pISSN:

2587-0750

Succession

Causation

Scientific processes

Natural law

Grounding

ProblemArt ardalık

Nedensellik

Bilimsel süreçler

Doğal yasa

Temellendirme

Sorun

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Mehmet Latif Bakış

Yayıncı: Artvin Çoruh University

Ana Başlıklar: Dini Araştırmalar (Diğer)

Dergi: Akademik-Us Issue 14, pp.40-52

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 12/2023

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001308748

pISSN: 2587-0750

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Mehmet Latif Bakış

Yayıncı:

Artvin Çoruh University

Ana Başlıklar:

Dini Araştırmalar (Diğer)

Dergi:

Akademik-Us Issue 14, pp.40-52

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001308748

pISSN:

2587-0750