Aristotle Vs American Ibn Sina

The past of an area of knowledge could be defined as the history of acquiring knowledge in that certain field. Throughout the past, the different ways in which humans acquire knowledge has changed drastically. However, how are humans so certain of the discoveries which are made? History evolves from human interpretation, which can later be confirmed by scientific method. However, not all historic interpretations can be confirmed that way. On the other hand, science is based on evidence and not confirmed true till a series of experiments are carried out. Nevertheless, not all scientific assumptions can be tested with experiments. By comparing the past to the present, we can see excessive changes which have modeled history and science, yet at

In order to understand the history of science, it is important to consider two major scientists; the Greek Aristotle and the Persian Ibn Sina. The reason why we approach these two scientists is because Ibn Sina could be considered one of the first “modern” scientists while Aristotle is more of an “ancient” scientist. The difference between the two is that Ibn Sina gained knowledge by the influences of such as Aristotle and Hippocrates6, in other words, from past knowledge. On the other hand, Aristotle came with his own beliefs on natural sciences, which are the fundamentals supporting many of his works7. Holding the difference between these two scientists in account, the same reasoning could be applied to science in a general view. Science holds major paradigm shifts which have contradicted many theories. A paradigm shift is defined as a fundamental change in an individual’s or society’s view of how things work in the world. An example of this is Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. Before Darwin’s theory, people mainly followed christianity and lived by the Bible’s rules8. Even to this day, there are people who oppose the Theory of evolution. Others argue that religion and Darwinism are incompatible because they are different fields which should not be associated with each other. Darwin’s theory evolved from following patterns from the past and finding new patterns. The effect of a paradigm shift on science is that every theory related to the subject before the shift will have to be disregarded. So how do we know when scientific conclusions are valid? This leads to the Hume’s problem of induction9. Although the method of drawing general conclusions based on experience is essential to understanding how things work, there is always something uncertain about these conclusions since we may acquire new data which