Hypothesis vs Theory 40

Hypothesis Vs Scientific Theory
The difference between a hypothesis and a scientific theory is that a hypothesis is a proposed
description while a scientific theory is a proven description for something. The difference between a
prediction and a hypothesis is that a prediction is a guess at what the results are going to be referring
to the proposed hypothesis, while a hypothesis is a proposed explanation where the experiment will
be based off of. A testable hypothesis would be useful in scientific experiments because it is testable,
also a directional hypothesis would be good because it is based off of theories. A non–directional
hypothesis would not be a good for investigations because they are based off on theories that have
little or no grounds. In the cell theory, all ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This challenges the cell theory because other than the first cell ever, all cells are derived from past
cells. The predicted outcome for spontaneous generation is that in a flask with no cell in it and no
access to open air, cells will not grow or be present. While in the cell theory cells starting out in a
flask will increase, when the flask that is empty will have no cell development. Pasteur uses a swan–
necked flask to keep the environment clean and closed off from any other cells. He broil the flask to
kill organism originally in the flask. Giraffes have long necks to eat food on higher trees or they
have long necks for males to show dominance. Most giraffes eat at shoulder height. Giraffes with
longer necks win more battles which means more mates. Longer necks means more fights won.
Right now the test are not conclusive enough to show that the long necks are for mating because you
cannot tell how many babies they are having. Lipids is a group of natural occurring molecule that
includes fat, wax, etc. Some are a liquids because they are saturated meaning their molecules
contain double bonds, while solids are unsaturated, having hydrogen atoms in its
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

The Theory Of Scientific Management
The purpose of this essay is to research, analyse and assess the theory of scientific management,
which was revolutionised by Frederick Winslow Taylor in 1887 (A.Huczynski, 2010) and to
critically evaluate the benefits and pitfalls of his theory. This theory Taylor developed is known as
Taylorism and has been used commonly in various structures of organisation. Comparisons shall be
drawn to other theories and advancements of this theory, such as Fordism and Toyotism, which was
extremely popular in Japan (Cheng, 2009). Using these variations of Taylorism, we can therefore
further and deepen the evaluation of his original theory. This essay aims to show that the
disadvantages outweigh the advantages due to changes in culture and worker's mentality.
Taylor's theory was built upon his key beliefs from observations he made in the workplace; that
workers could increase efficiency by "reducing deliberate underworking by employees"
(A.Huczynski, 2010) and that by standardising roles he could increase production and efficiency,
through delegating certain small roles across a labour force. He believed that if each individual
worker could perform one small task extremely well that both efficiency and most importantly, to
the shareholders of the firm, the people who have most of the power, profits would increase.
Someone who was seemingly inspired by Taylorism was the founder of Ford Motor Company,
Henry Ford. He took the standardisation theory (A.Huczynski, 2010) to new levels and

What Is Intelligent Design A Scientific Theory?
A brief introduction
Intelligent Design: Intelligent design seeks evidence of design in nature. According to the theory of
intelligent design certain features of the universe and living beings are best explained by an
intelligent cause, not by an undirected process such as natural selection.
Intelligent design vs creationism
Intelligent design theory is not the same as creationism. This theory is an effort to empirically detect
whether the features of everything around us are genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause)
or due to natural selection. Creationism is different; it typically starts with a religious text and tries
to see how the findings of science can fit to it. The Intelligent design theory doesn't claim that the
intelligent cause detected through science is supernatural; done by God. It is agnostic regarding the
source of design
Intelligent design ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It argues that many structures in plants and animals bear the unmistakable signature of design by
intelligence. They could not have possibly just evolved from a simpler structure. On the other hand,
Darwin's theory of evolution tells us that humans evolved from non–human life as the result of a
natural process, which was gradual and random, happening over billions of years,. It tells us that all
life on Earth has its origins to a single common ancestor.
Is Intelligent design a scientific theory?
Whether ID is science or pseudoscience is also a question. Even though it is regarded as Intelligent
Design "theory", Intelligent Design proponents generally fail to meet the norms for good scientific
behavior in their work on Intelligent Design. It is not testable because it doesn't specify what the
Designer is or how the Designer operates, it cannot generate expected output and hence we cannot
figure out whether the basic premises of Intelligent Design are correct or incorrect, thus it is not
falsifiable.
Concept of Intelligent design from scientists' point of

The Theory Of Science And Scientific Revolutions
Thomas Kuhn was an American philosopher, born in 1922, whom wrote about the distinction
between normal science and revolutionary science. He was interpreted as a destroyer of logical
empiricism throughout his career, and this is because his work seemed to show how interesting it
was to connect philosophical questions about science with questions about the history of science.
Throughout this essay, I will connect these questions together by explaining Kuhn's account of the
structure of normal science and scientific revolutions. Firstly, normal science and revolutionary
science are pieces of a paradigm. A paradigm, in turn, is a whole way of doing science. It is a
package of claims about the world, habits of scientific thought and action, ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This could be a successful experiment, or the formulation of a set of laws. These specific
achievements are what Kuhn says causes a paradigm in the narrow sense. This means that
paradigms in the broad sense, include within them, paradigms in the narrow sense. When a
paradigm is used, it is often associated with normal science and revolutionary science. In short,
normal science is well organized. These scientists tend to approach determined important problems
specifically, and assess possible situations. Similarly, they agree on what the world is like in the
broad sense. Revolutionary science, on the other hand, occurs when a paradigm breaks down and is
replaced with another one (77). Karl Popper, born in 1902, presents objections against Kuhn's
normal and revolutionary science arguments, and following I will explain these objections, Kuhn's
replies, and reveal the most important of them all. Popper thought that science was characterized by
permanent openness, however Kuhn disagreed. He thinks that it is false for science to exhibit a
permanent openness to the testing of fundamental ideas and that science would be worse off should
this occur (78). Popper makes another claim about scientific change, stating that science proceeds
through a single process; that of conjecture and refutation. Although there can be revolutions, they
are considered to be larger conjecture and more dramatic refutations. Kuhn rebuttals and states that
this cannot be

The Theory Of The Scientific Revolution
In the Scientific Revolution, "there occurred a shift in humans ' thinking from the medieval
emphasis on God 's eternal unchanging world, which governed people, the universe, and nature, to
an approach that defined knowledge and understanding as derived from the immutable laws of
nature independent of received truth." Scientists changed the way people think about the world. The
gears of the revolution began to turn when Copernicus questioned the geocentric theory, developing
his theory of heliocentrism. Many scientists use the method of beginning with a question,
experimenting, then falsifying the previous theory. This method of thinking became what is now
known as the scientific method. Scientists impacted all fields of science from cosmology to biology.
The fields of mathematics, chemistry, and medicine were drastically improved because of the
scientists in their fields who discovered new concepts to propell the movement. In all three fields,
there was a thirst for understanding and organization that was answered by the revolutionary new
concepts. For chemistry, it was the development of the scientific method, for mathematics, it was the
organization of the universe, and for medicine, it was the movement towards clinical practices.
Due to prominent mathematicians of the time period, the field of mathematics was expanded
because of the reason that it provided in a socially chaotic time period. In the French language,
raison is the word in french for reason and also the

The Theory Of Science And Scientific Revolutions
Thomas Kuhn was an American philosopher, born in 1922, whom wrote about the distinction
between normal science and revolutionary science. He was seen as a destroyer of logical empiricism
throughout his career. This was because his work seemed to show how interesting it was to connect
philosophical questions about science, with questions about the history of science. Throughout this
essay, I will connect questions of philosophy and the history of science together by explaining
Kuhn's account of the structure of normal science and scientific revolutions. Firstly, normal science
and revolutionary science are pieces of a paradigm. A paradigm, in turn, is a whole way of doing
science. It is a package of claims about the world, habits of scientific thought and action, and
methods for gathering and analyzing data (76). A paradigm is a belief that the community supports
in terms of which scientific view is correct. For example, "the sun rises in the east each morning" is
a paradigm that numerous past and present generations believe. The role of a paradigm is to
organize scientific work, as it categorizes the work of individuals into efficient collective
enterprises. There are two forms of paradigms, the first being the broad sense, while the second is
the narrow sense. The broad sense paradigm is the one explained above; where a paradigm is a
package of ideas and methods, and when combined, create a view of the world, and a way of science
(77). A key part of a broad sense paradigm

Outline Scientific Theory
Between all of the factors that outline the scientific studies such the theories, hypothesis and even
law but what differences and similarities do they share? A scientific theory is usually said to be a
well tested concept that explains an endless supply of observations. For example we obviously know
that the Earth revolves around the sun and has been tested through observation and experiment
which clearly cant come up with another explanation to contradict this theory. On the other end of
the spectrum we have scientific hypothesis which is commonly seen as a possible explanation for a
set of observations or answer to a scientific question must be testable. A great example that can be
used is if you were to test smokers and observing which

Taylorism Theory Of Scientific Management
Many theorists have influenced and demonstrated certain ideas and concepts that influence the
social and psychological factors in an organisational management. Taylorism theory of scientific
management developed techniques for improving the efficiency of the work process. The scientific
management approach revolves around the idea of arranging for work to accomplish proficiency,
institutionalization, specialization, and improvement. With Taylor's scientific approach decisions are
based on science or exact measurements. Taylor's theory decreased its role dramatically in the event
of being questioned whether scientific management was efficient. The human relation school of
management thought developed due to the flaws in the assumptions of the Taylorism theory.
Taylorism was inclined towards efficiency, process and principle, however critiques felt human
behavior was neglected. Organisations should take initiative in helping employees adjust to
organisational life by nurturing cooperative systems between labour and management. Finally, this
essay will reveal the evolution from Taylor's scientific principles of management to Elton Mayo's
Human Relation School of Thought as employee well–being and motivation has been given more
recognition over the course of time.
Fredrick Taylor made an observation of men at work which led him to develop what is known as
Taylorism management theory. He theorized that workers were inefficient because they tend to
ration their workload less than

The Theory Of Consciousness And The Scientific Processes
Processes and ideas are constantly changing, even evolving. This occurs across the entire spectrum
of most all environments with dynamics natures; within society, within religion, and within science.
More specifically, both the study and observation of consciousness and the scientific processes
allocated towards those ends have changed profoundly over time. It can also be observed that the
evolution of the study of consciousness parallels the development of the scientific method, to the
extent that an evaluation of the former can indicate the developmental position of the latter. This is
clearly evidenced throughout Miller 's essay on the former topic, and the essay itself can be
interpreted as a chronology of the latter topic when approaching it from this viewpoint. The chief
elements that serve towards this end–indicating the development of theories on consciousness and
the scientific processes behind them–are societal and religious pressures, two elements that are
exceedingly prevalent in Miller 's work.
Religion and society had large influences on the rate of development and, consequentially, the
quality of early theories of consciousness, in effect improving the former while markedly
diminishing the latter. Within the essay, there were many examples of societal pressures driving the
likes of Mesmer, Baron Dupotet, Elliotson and their historic counterparts into hurried and less than
rational–and less than scientific–studies and conclusions. For instance, at the opening

The Theory Of Scientific Management Essay
According to Miller (2010) Scientific management (Taylorism) was devised by Frederick Taylor to
improve economic efficiency especially labor productivity by analyzing and establishing workflows.
It was one of the earliest attempts to apply science to the engineering of processes and to
management. Taylor's scientific management was based on four principles. The first is replacing the
"rule of thumb" work methods with methods based on a scientific study. The second is selecting,
training and developing the most suitable person for the job. The third principle is managers should
give out detailed instructions on how to do the job scientifically and supervise workers. The last
principle is dividing the tasks between managers and workers. This paper will discuss if these
scientific management principles are outdated in the study of organizations. I will present the
principles and explain their relevance in current organizations.
The "rule of thumb" is a procedure that developed from experience and common sense. It totally
ignores scientific knowledge. Taylor argued that for an organization to become more efficient
managers had to develop a "science of work" that is cultivating methods based on a scientific study
of those tasks. Morgan (2006) asserts that this was done to determine the most efficient way of
doing work. The scientific method would therefore simplify worker's tasks in detail and specify the
amount of work needed to do the task and the necessary time to finish that

No Miracles Argument: A Successful Scientific Theory
The No Miracles Argument states that it would be miraculous for scientific theories to predict
incredibly precise and surprising predictions if the theories were not true. Thus, the theories must be
true, or at least very nearly so. In other words, the No Miracles Argument says that the astounding
empirical success of some scientific theories would be nearly impossible if they were not true, or at
least approximately true. Scientific realism 'is the only philosophy of science that does not make the
success of science a miracle' (Psillos 2006).
General relativity is an example of a currently successful scientific theory. General relativity has
been confirmed in all experiments, and by all observations to date. General relativity is the current
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The selectionist explanation assigns the success of current scientific theories to the fact that
"unsuccessful theories have been eliminated in a process of selection comparable to the selection
process operative in the biological world" (Wray, 2007). Realists would argue that considering the
success of our current theories, it would be a miracle if our theories did not well reflect the
construction of the world. This line of reasoning is known as the No Miracles Argument. Thus,
realists offer a choice in the form of an exhaustive dichotomy: the success of science is either a
miracle, or our current theories accurately represent the structure of the world (Wray 2007). The
selectionist explanation is modeled after Darwin's theory of natural selection explanation for the
remarkable fit seen between animals and the environments they inhabit. Natural selection ensures
that organisms lacking such a quality of fit are destroyed over a sufficient time period. Thus, when
the biological world is examined, the only organisms found (on average) are those which currently
fit their respective environments. Parallel reasoning of this principle when examining the world of
science says that we should not be surprised to find only successful theories because all unfit
theories have been eliminated, or are on their way towards elimination (Wray 2007). It would not
make sense for unfit theories to survive due to the nature of the scientific world because a rational
scientist would reject a theory that does not enable them to make accurate predictions (Wray 2007).
The strength of the selectionist explanation lies in its ability to explain why previously accepted
theories come to be expelled. Thus, the selectionist explanation can account for the failures of
science. A realist cannot argue that a theory that once accurately

The Impact Of Scientific Theory On The Development Of The...
Question One: Theory Part One Research is important in our society since it contributes to the
development of the world we live in through the application of theory. Research allows us to
investigate, experiment, develop, support and explore previous facts and work of new and existing
theories. The research and the investigation of topics should be significant, relevant, and of interest
to those working and studying in the field. A systematic approach using a research method that
provides accurate, reliable, and selective critical use of data is necessary for conducting a good
research. A good research supports or challenges existing theory. In the world of theory, theory in
common language differs from scientific theory, and psychological theory. Theory in common
language is use to mean a guess, idea or speculation that someone has about something that is not
tested. Scientific theory is an explanation for a phenomenon based on previous observations that
have been built on a set of facts and principles that will allow us to predict future behaviors and
events . Psychology theory describes a behavior and make predictions about future behaviors,
emotions, and thoughts of individuals. Nevertheless, knowing the terms and the differences about
theories and concepts would allow researchers to have a better understanding on how to use and
apply the terms in theory. The researcher must have a clear picture of how to develop a study that
includes the adequate information

Scientific Theory Vs Common Sense
What causes humans to act the way they do? How do we grow and change throughout our lives?
These types of questions and many others are exactly what scientific theories try to answer. A
Scientific Theory is a proposed answer to a scientific question that is backed by experiments,
research, and other data. Scientific theories try to explain what has happened in the past and make
predictions about what will occur in the future. "A scientific theory is a systematic explanation that
unifies various observed phenomena and facts." ( Watson, 2002, p.11).
The main difference between a scientific theory and common sense is that a scientific theory takes
an objective view of a situation or question. It uses facts and well–developed ideas to support its
conclusion. When we analyze a situation with common sense, we are relying only on our own
beliefs and experiences. For example, imagine you see a child being disobedient and throwing a
tantrum in the middle of a supermarket. Common sense might equate this to the child being
overtired or poorly disciplined. A scientific theorist would take a deeper look at the situation and
using different theories might decide that the behavior resulted instead because the child is at a stage
where he hasn't learned to communicate his wants and wishes properly. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Some theories of Human Development look at cognitive growth, while others discuss social growth.
The age range that is studied can vary as well. Some theorists may choose to focus on young
children and others on teenagers or young adulthood. The main thing that unifies these theories is
that they examine how humans grow and change and the things that influence how we

The Theory Of Scientific Revolutions
In my essay I plan to argue that Thomas Kuhn was incorrect when he presented his theory that no
paradigm is better than any other paradigm and how he believed that people who occupy different
paradigms are in different universes, in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. I believe
that there is no valid deductive or inductive support for incommensurability, there are examples
against it throughout the history of science that do not exhibit the discontinuity and replacement of
paradigms, as Kuhn's incommensurability thesis predicts, but rather continuity and supplementation.
If this is correct, then there are no compelling epistemic reasons to believe that Kuhn's
incommensurability thesis is true or probable. The argument that the point of the same kind terms
changes or ceases from one theoretical context to another, it does not fundamentally mean that these
two abstract frameworks are taxonomically or methodologically incommensurable. Kuhn's theory
takes a relativist stance and uses it to make all theories and paradigms equal with none being better
than the other. This poses a major problem because the hope of scientific research is best said as
"For a realist conception of scientific progress also wishes to assert that, by and large, later science
improves on earlier science, in particular by approaching closer to the truth." This means that all
realist scientist hope that by advancing our scientific knowledge we will eventually come closer to
the truth about

Alan Chalmers 's Theory Of Scientific Knowledge
Falsification in Science – the "Hypothetico–deductive" method
"Scientific knowledge is proven knowledge. Scientific theories are derived in some rigorous way
from the facts of experience acquired by observation and experiment. Science is based on what we
can see and hear and touch, etc. Personal opinion or preferences and speculative imaginings have no
place in science. Science is objective. Scientific knowledge is reliable knowledge because it is
objectively proven knowledge."
– Alan Chalmers, What Is This Thing Called Science?, 1982, p.1.
Chalmers represents the traditional inductivist view with his statement on science. An inductivist
makes observations, then creates a general statement that aims to explain the encountered
phenomenon. However, Karl Popper, another scientific philosopher, has completely rejected this
scientific method and has argued against the sole use of induction when conducting scientific
research. Unsatisfied with Chalmers' method, and the traditional inductive method in general, he
instead made his own 'version' of the scientific method, dubbed 'the hypothetico–deductive method'.
These two scientific methods contrast each other, and to demonstrate their difference Chalmers'
statement will be evaluated using the typical view of one who subscribes to Popper's 'hypothetico–
deductive' method of falsification. I will then evaluate the two methods, commenting on their
individual limitations and merits.
To contrast the two methods, Popper's

Scientific Management And Human Relations Theory
Scientific management is a management theory developed by Frederick W Taylor. Its main purpose
is to improve an organization's efficiency in production through analyzing workflow systematically
using quantitative analysis to improve task completion efficiency. Reducing waste, increasing
methods of production and create a just distribution of goods are goals of the scientific management
theory. On the other hand, human relations theory attributed by Elton Mayo counteracts with
scientific management theory that ignored human issues of behavior. In human relations theory, a
worker is treated as an individual and what motivates and cultivates them in their achievement is
analyzed. Both scientific management and human relation theory aims to improve efficiency in the
workplace and it still applies to the workforce in the modern days despite the opposing ideas of both
theories.
The scientific management theory have an assumption that workers are lazy, not smart in analyzing
tasks, only prefers simplified work and only works for money (Miller & Form, 1964). According to
Taylor (2004), workers are unable figure out the most efficient way in doing work. Therefore, they
are thought as replaceable working parts like a machine in the production line and can be trained to
specialize in a certain procedure in the production. They are assumed to adopt the Protestant work
ethic, working for long hours and not taking any breaks. Whenever a worker or a 'part' failed to
perform its tasks, they

Scientific Theories Are Not Random Guesses
Growing up, I have been taught to believe that the universe was first created by God and that all of
mankind shared that same ancestors, Adam and Eve. However, if one's belief is that of science, then
they probably believe in Darwin's theory of evolution which states all organisms originated from
microscopic organisms who have changed and been modified over time. However, whatever your
theory may be, it is only plausible if it accurately describes an observation and makes definite
predictions about the results of future observations.
As the National Academy of Sciences explains, a scientific theory is "a comprehensive explanation
of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence" (Scientific). Scientific
theories ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They thought if we are nothing more than an animal, how can we be God 's special creation? Most
American Protestants considered the Bible to be the literal truth. The Bible borrows from science
observations, and religion is what gives us the reason to pursue science. Universe was made from a
god that was already here. Creationist disagree with the theory of evolution because, similar to the
theory of gravity, they are just theories. Newton believed the same law controlling falling apples
must also control the movement of the planets. However, when he was asked what gravity is, he was
unable to answer the question. So creationist questioned whether or not gravity was really God.
They figured if it is an unknown force that no one has seen before, it had to the power of God. They
came to this conclusion because like gravity, we have never seen God, it could only make sense to
them that God is gravity.
There is a confusion between science and faith. The misconception is that the creation of Darwin's
theory led the scientific and theological communities need to take up positions opposing each other.
But history reveals that one of the earliest supporters of evolutionary theory in the American
scientific community was a devout Christian botanist named Asa Gray. Gray argued that "divine
guidance might somehow channel the course of natural selection" (Zimmer). He believed that faith
is their belief,

A Scientific Theory Of Consciousness
Whether a scientific theory of consciousness could be provided requires the theory to account for
properties of sensations. Place thinks some philosophers struggle to accept a scientific theory by
falling for the phenomenological fallacy. Some have posited descriptions of experience lye within
the mental cinema (pg. 49). Place characterized the fallacy of thinking that when we perceive
something green we are perceiving something green in the mind as 'the phenomenological fallacy'.
He writes, if we assume, for example, that when a subject reports a green after–image he is asserting
the occurrence inside himself of an object which is literally green, it is clear that we have on our
hands an entity for which there is no place in the world of physics. He proposes the descriptions of
green after–images are descriptions of a sort of normal response in contexts involving green light.
In "Sensations are Brain Processes", J.J.C Smart argues that "in so far as a sensation statement is a
report of something, that something is in fact a brain process" (Smart 1959 145). The 'Sensation–
Brain Process Identity Theory' states: For any type of sensation state 'S', there is a type of brain state
'B' such that: 'S = B'. In defense of this thesis Smart clears up Place's identity distinction with his
sense of strict identity. S and B are strictly identical when 'S' and 'B' are two names for a single
object.
The 'Sensation State Brain Process Identity Theory' asserts for each phenomenal state

The Theory Of Scientific Management
3. Scientific Management
It is necessary to understand where the organization of work is headed. Through specialization,
subordinate can upgrade their abilities or professions and there was a concerted effort to identify key
aspects of work and organization which could be used to achieve efficiency through immutable
principles. Taylor thinks management should merge with science to enhance the effectiveness.
3.1 Taylorism by Fred W. Taylor (1856–1915)
Taylor's scientific management theory suggests the idea of 'one right way' to manage an
organization, which is the best way for worker to achieve their own duties by providing them proper
tools and training. The old saying goes, 'Practice Makes Perfect', the concept suggests organization
to industrialized, standardized mass production, so uncomplicated work do not need skilled workers,
they can learn faster, perform better and speed up when they get more familiar with their work. Such
pattern of work can achieve the economies of scale, provide affordable for average customers. He
broke down the whole work into individual motion and analyze the each part of work to have a clear
division of task and responsibilities, then timed and selected the right worker to do particular part of
work, following a machinelike routine in order to enhance the productivity.
3.2 Fordism by Henry Ford (1863–1947)
Ford's scientific management theory is a system about production, consumption and based on
Taylorist principles, it introduced a new

Theories Of Scientific Management Theory And Human...
Executive Summary
The National Institute of Personnel Management (NIPM) of India defined human resource
management as "that part of management which is concerned with people at work and with their
relationship within an enterprise. Its aim is to bring together and develop into an effective
organization of the men and women who make up an enterprise and having regard for the well–
being of the individuals and of working groups, to enable them to make their best contribution to its
success." Human resource management always seeks the best theory to fulfill their intent in
managing the human resource. Some of the famous theories are scientific management theory and
behavioral management theory.
Scientific management theory is the starting point where people start to think scientifically. They do
not only depend on common habitual without considering it is efficient or not anymore. They start to
think effectively in enhancing productivity. Scientific management theory proposed some way in
order to get the most ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
But it will be a great combination if both of them are put into the society. It is because both of them
are completing each other. We cannot deny the fact that organization needs the most effective and
efficient way to accomplish the most profitable goal. But in another side, we should consider too
that it is not only about the number and quantitative things. We need something that we called
qualitative thing which can support the quantitative thing. We cannot ignore that the satisfaction of
employee can affect the productivity. That is why, scientific management theory and behavioral
management should be mixing in order to get the primary point of Human Resource Management
itself, namely effectiveness, development of human resources, the organizational's goals, and
satisfaction of employee in giving best contribute to organization's

Human Relations Theory vs Scientific Method Theory
Scientific Method Theory
By Fedrick Taylor
And
Human Relations Theory
(Hawthorne Studies)
By Elton Mayo
Student Name:
Subject: Human Relations
Date: 14th October, 2010
The Scientific Management Theory (Taylorism)
In 1911, Frederick Winslow Taylor published his work, The Principles of Scientific Management, in
which he described how the application of the scientific method to the management of workers
greatly could improve productivity.
Scientific management methods called for optimizing the way that tasks were performed and
simplifying the jobs enough so that workers could be trained to perform their specialized sequence
of motions in the one "best" way.
Before the scientific management theory, work tasks ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
No attention for soft factors. * Mechanistic. Treating people as machines. * Separation of planning
function and doing. * Loss of skill level and autonomy at worker level. Not very useful in current
knowledge worker environments (except as an antithesis).
The Human Relations Theory (The Hawthorne Effect)
The Hawthorne Studies (or experiments) were conducted from 1927 to 1932 at the Western Electric
Hawthorne Works in Chicago, where Harvard Business School professor Elton Mayo examined
productivity and work conditions.
Elton Mayo started these experiments by examining the physical and environmental influences of

the workplace (e.g. brightness of lights, humidity) and later, moved into the psychological aspects
(e.g. breaks, group pressure, working hours, managerial leadership) and their impact on employee
motivation as it applies to productivity.
The Hawthorne Effect can be summarized as "Employees are more productive because the
employees know they are being studied." Elton Mayo's experiments showed an increase in worker
productivity was produced by the psychological stimulus of being singled out, involved, and made
to feel important.
Specifically, Mayo wanted to find out what effect fatigue and monotony had on job productivity and
how to control them through such variables as rest breaks, work hours, temperature and humidity. In
the process, he stumbled upon a principle of human motivation that would help to revolutionize the
theory and

The Theories Of A Scientific Research
It comes in no surprise that only those theories which make accurate predictions as well as fitting
the empirical data count as being adequate and deemed 'good' science. In relation to the confusion
associated with the unobservable mechanisms, anti–realist offer the view that just because the
concepts of observable and unobservable are vague, it does not automatically mean they are not
useful or false (Okasha 2002). The dependence of observation in proposing theory makes it hard and
sometimes even impossible to come up conclusively falsify theories all the time. Not to mention that
observable and unobservable mechanisms are not that difference after all (Okasha 2002).
Correspondingly, as long as they are able to clarify and explain phenomena, all we need to do is to
choose the best available. Once we have a theory in hand, as a result, we should have certain ability
to predict the future, which is one of the key motivations for performing scientific research. Model
is one of the most popular methods adopted by researchers to predict the future. The models of
animal flocking behaviour, San Fransisco Bay model, and climate model are just few of the models
which are regularly used to represent and explain the world in a simplified and mathematical way
(Smith 2008; Weisberg 2013). Due to its countless applicable properties, the use of models is not
limited to science only. After all, there are numerous advantages including the reduction in costs, the
ability to examine effect of

The Development Of A Scientific Theory
Assignment 1 P1 The development of a scientific theory
Date Event
1809 First theory of evolution available
Jean–Baptiste Lamarck is a French naturalist, soldier, biologist and academic. He gave out his
theory of evolution. His theory was that evolution occurred through the inheritance of developed
characteristics, or the use/disuse theory.
1831 A new world
Charles Darwin was very young and still a student, joins the journey of the HMS Beagle as a
naturalist.
1844 The First Essay
Charles Darwin was working for many years, writes an essay on the theory of evolution. Unluckily,
this was never published.
1858 Rivalry for Evolution
Alfred Russel Wallace issues a paper. The paper had some of the same assumptions as Darwin,
including natural selection. Darwin 's friends present both Wallace 's and Darwin 's theories at the
Linnean Society.
1859 The Origin of Species
Darwin was suffering from sickness both in himself and his family, completes his book "The Origin
of Species" and issues it. It becomes very popular.
1865 Heredity experimentation
Mendel 's works with pea plants is given out, setting the background for the basis of natural
selection.
1892 Importance of DNA in heredity
August Weismann gives out answers detailing how important DNA is to heredity. Along with the
germ cell theory. The theory that legacy only takes place by means of germ cells. For example: egg
and sperm. Those other cells do not pass on their genes.
1903 Chromosomes and heredity

Walter

The Validity Of A Scientific Theory
The world is a complicated place that works in mysterious ways, but people, with their inquisitive
minds, refuse to let even the most confounding puzzles go unsolved. Science provides explanations
for aspect of the world with no tangible evidence. But more often than not, science gets it wrong.
One way to test the validity of a scientific theory is the use of the Hypothetico–Deductive Method.
The results of such a method provide evidence of confirmation or disconfirmation, though these
results cannot always be trusted. The world is complicated, thus it requires an equally complicated
instrument of discovery. With such complexity, philosophical problems in reasoning are bound to
arise, but there is always a solution to such issues. The Hypothetico–Deductive Method, called H–D
from here on out, is a way of reasoning about theoretical (dis)conformation where a person deduces
an observational prediction from a hypothesis. Said hypothesis is then tested to determine whether
or not the theory is confirmed. The basic H–D model states HO, if the hypothesis is true, then the
prediction will be observed. This basic model consists of basic confirming and basic disconfirming
instances of experiments, which state, respectively, O/H, the prediction is true and observed,
therefore the hypothesis is confirmed, and ~O/~H, the prediction is not true and not observed,
therefore the hypothesis is disconfirmed. For the swan theory, an experiment would be set up in
which the experimenter

Is The Theory Of Basis Data Scientific?
1. Is the theory's basis data scientific? The trait/biological approach is a little scientific. The data
used to establish the traits does not include a large and diverse sample. The theorists who did collect
data collected it from individuals whose personalities supported their theories. Raymond Cattell
collected three types of data: L–data (behavior in everyday situations), Q–data (self–reported
questionnaires), and OT–data (objective tests). With the data, Cattell ran a factor analysis and if the
data correlated, they would be clustered together to create a factor. The majority of the data he
collected is subjective. The five–factor model was developed by opening up the dictionary and
picking adjectives. The participants were asked to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The biological approach tried to supply the explanation. One explanation is temperament.
Hippocrates and Galen proposed there were four humors and temperaments responded to them
making up four personalities. Franz Joseph Gall theorized that temperaments existed physically in
our heads and he claimed he could identify people's temperaments by the bumps on their brains.
Ernst Kretchmer and William Sheldon believed temperaments were based on three body types:
pyknic (heavier, rounder); athletic (fit); and asthenic (thinner). Emil Kraepelin, who was born the
same year as Freud approached pathology as links in families. If we had given more recognition to
Kraepelin rather than Freud, we would be further in the field. Thomas and Chess identified three
different temperaments from parents reporting about their children: easy/well–adjusted,
difficult/undercontrolled, and slow–to–warm/inhibited. Strong relationships with how people were
identified as children and how they were measured as adults were found. Kegan through more
objective observations identified there were only two temperament styles: inhibited (more reactive)
and uninhibited (welcome to new people/things). The second explanation is genetics. Research done
on twin studies found that identical twins that were raised apart were more statistically similar to
each other. A meta–analysis was done that concluded that forty percent of variance in personality
can be attributed to genetics. The third explanation of

The Theory Of The Scientific Method
"If we understand how researchers separate fact from fiction perhaps we too can avoid some of the
pit falls of faulty reasoning and unwarranted conclusions in our everyday lives (Zimbardo, 2001)." I
believe this is why scientists– including psychologists– think more logically rather than emotionally.
They need and/or want proof of a 'phenomenon ' and so they go looking for that proof. Until they
find an answer concerning that particular phenomenon, they will most likely not stop conducing
experiments. This is how hypotheses are formed. Someone asks a question and then figures out the
best way to get the answer to that question. It is a remarkable process. The part of that process that I
will be talking about is the hypothesis. To put it simply, a hypothesis is an educated guess; better yet,
it is a prediction. These predictions are drawn by logic and can be tested. Formulating a hypothesis
is the second step in the scientific method. "If more and more hypotheses related to a theory turn out
to be true, the theory gains in credibility (King, pg. 27)." After you have formed a hypotheses, you
will need to test your predication. Depending on what the hypotheses is concerning, you could test it
in a case study, survey, or even a laboratory experiment. I hypothesized that more men, rather than
women, would say that having an affair was okay in certain circumstances. I told my participants
that the only thing they were to consider an affair was sexual intercourse only. For

Classical Scientific Management Theory And Human Relations...
This paper will be expressing a few of the different theoretical perspectives. This paper will be
discussing the Scientific Management, Cultural Perspective, Political–Economic Theory, and
Human Relations Theory. It will also be discussing each of the key concepts that are associated
within each theoretical perspective. I will state some of the strengths and some of the weaknesses of
each theory that was mentioned above. Lastly, my opinion for each of these theories would be
provided to give you a look on how they are run in the society. I hope to give the reader and inside
look on how these organizations are being run.
Classical Scientific Management Theory Organizations have a variety of people, but each person
handles work differently. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Conflict could resolve in losing employees due to how they are being treated within their work
environment. Management would be without employees and there would be a loss of productivity.
Some of the strengths would be that the workers were experienced and know how to do their
job/tasks correctly. This is a strength because you have trustworthy professionals who know what
they are doing with that certain task. A weakness would be how the employees were silenced and
overworked (Kirst–Ashman, 2014). This is a weakness because I know how being silenced can be.
At my old job, we didn't have much of a say and work became irritating to the point that I left. Not
being heard on ideas does have consequences. And in the scientific management theory, there is no
communication with management.
Cultural Theory This cultural perspective is a theory that is being used all the time and will not
change. The cultural perspective on organizations believes that each of the organizations establish a
distinctive mixture of values, standards, presumptions, and practices about how things should be
done that eventually becomes a habit (Kirst–Ashman, 2014). The cultural theory is to go on with
their tradition in what they are used to do. If it ain't broke, don't fix it (Kirst–Ashman, 2014).
Because of how much they are used to their way working, it becomes a norm, a routine, and will not
take new ideas into thought. With this kind of mind, it helps employees to focus on a certain way,

What Are The Scientific Management Theories
Brief Analysis of the four theoretical contributions which are central to the understanding of today's
Organizations:
1. Scientific Management – F.W Taylor:
Frederick W. Taylor was recognized as the father of the "scientific management" theory. Taylor's
Scientific Management Theory is not just a collection of purely technical principles and practices,
but also the cooperation and harmonization of fundamental relationships between people and
machines and techniques; between people in the production process, especially between the
manager and the employee. Thanks to this theory applied in the industrial enterprises, the labor
productivity has increased dramatically; The final result is high profitability, both employers and
workers are high income. His scientific approach requires detailed observation and measurement of
routine work, in order to find the best working way. Taylor's approach is categorized as the bottom
up approach. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Nevertheless, Frederick Taylor laid the foundations for mass production techniques, which had
influenced in industrial practices as well as the general theoretical ideas of organization, not only for
industrial sector, but also in the service sector.
Frederick W. Taylor's scientific management principles include: Dividing responsibility for work
from workers to managers. The manager is the planner and the job designer, the worker is the person
who performs the task; Use scientific methods to determine the most effective way of doing things,
dividing the work for the worker appropriately, specifying how to accomplish the task; Choose the
best person to perform the work as planned; Train employees effectively; Monitor workers to ensure
appropriate workflows and from there to achieve corresponding results.
2. Administrative Theory – H.

Scientific Theories Are Objectively Justified
Scientific theories are objectively justified (Couvalis, 1997) and scientists are seen as being able to
gather and interpret evidence that can be concluded as scientifically proven (Ladyman, 2002). In the
majority of areas in modern society, including justice, health and safety, scientific evidence is
heavily relied upon (Ladyman, 2002). However, there are certain principles that are required for a
theory to be scientific. For example, it must be justified by observation permeated by theories
(Couvalis, 1997). In other words, it must be theory–laden. Moreover, scientific theories contain
generalisations and one method for justifying statements with full confidence on the basis of other
statements is deductive reasoning (Couvalis, 1997). ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This will be considered throughout this essay with regards to the topics of addiction, genocide and
expressed emotion in family communication.
Rassool (2011) defines addiction as "any behaviour, activity, substance, object or thing that has
taken control of an individual's life–style, that is causing harm to the individual and family" (p4).
The majority of us are exposed to a range of addictive behaviours that impact on individuals and
families across socio–economic and cultural areas, and it has been argued that we now live in an
addictive society (Rassool, 2011). Addiction is useful in enhancing our scientific understanding of
human behaviour due to its classification via the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual 5th edition
(DSM–5), which is the standard classification of mental disorders. It is used for clinical, research
and policy purposes and has a large influence on the diagnosis and treatments of disorders across
many countries (Hasin et al, 2013). Another way in which addiction can be measured is using the
Dependence Syndrome. According to Edwards and Ross (1976), elements of the syndrome include;
increased tolerance to alcohol, avoidance of withdrawal symptoms, compulsion to drink, and rapid
relapse after abstinence. These measurements of addiction aid our scientific understanding of human
behaviour because they allow for a more reliable and valid diagnosis, consequently impacting
treatment and thus, enhancing psychologists'

Realists Vs. Scientific Theory
.Convergent realists often argue for their position by pointing to the increasing success of science.
This requires that there be a reasonable inference from a scientific theory 's success to its
approximate truth. The argument that realists are trying to make is that the best explanation of a
scientific theory 's success is that it is true. Larry Laudan refutes the realists ' argument from the
success of science. To do this, he characterize his opposition as "Convergent Epistemological
Realism." Convergent realism is a theory about the nature and history of science.
Laudan identifies five central claims for convergent epistemological realism.
R1) Scientific theories (at least in the 'mature' sciences) are typically approximately true ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The empirical success of science (in the sense of giving detailed explanations and accurate
predictions) accordingly provides striking empirical confirmation for realism.
According to Laudan, convergent epistemological realism involves two abductive arguments by
realists.
Argument 1: Inference to the best explanation from R1, R2, and R5.
P1: If scientific theories are approximately true, they will typically be empirically successful;
P2: If the central terms in scientific theories genuinely refer, those theories will generally be
empirically successful.
P3: Scientific theories are empirically successful.
C: (Probably) Theories are approximately true and their terms genuinely refer.
Argument 2: Inference to the best explanation from R3 and R5.
P1: If the earlier theories in a 'mature ' science are approximately true and if the central terms of
those theories genuinely refer, then later more successful theories in the same science will preserve
the earlier theories as limiting cases;
P2: Scientists seek to preserve earlier theories as limiting cases and generally succeed.
C: (Probably) Earlier theories in a 'mature ' science are approximately true and genuinely referential.
For his refutation of argument 1, Laudan (addressing Putnam) states that the realist seemingly
requires claims S1–S4.

– S1) The theories in the advanced or mature sciences are successful;

Classical Scientific Management Theory And Human Relations...
Introduction
This paper will be expressing a few of the different theoretical perspectives. This paper will be
discussing the Scientific Management, Cultural Perspective, Political–Economic Theory, and
Human Relations Theory. It will also be discussing each of the key concepts that are associated
within each theoretical perspective. I will state some of the strengths and some of the weaknesses of
each theory that was mentioned above. Lastly, my opinion for each of these theories would be
provided to give you a look on how they are run in the society. I hope to give the reader and inside
look on how these organizations are being run.
Classical Scientific Management Theory Organizations have a variety of people, but each person
handles work ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Conflict could resolve in losing employees due to how they are being treated within their work
environment. Management would be without employees and there would be loss of productivity.
Some of the strengths would be that the workers were experienced and know how to do their
job/tasks correctly. This is a strength because you have trustworthy professionals who know what
they are doing with that certain task. A weakness would be how the employees were silenced and
overworked (Kirst–Ashman, 2014). This is a weakness because I know how being silenced can be.
At my old job, we didn't have much of a say and work became irritating to the point that I left. Not
being heard on ideas does have consequences. And in the scientific management theory there is no
communication with management.
Cultural Theory This cultural perspective is a theory that is being used all the time and will not
change. Cultures are seen as structured by two forms of constrain on individual behavior
(Thompson, Ellis, and Wildavsky, 1991). The cultural perspective on organizations believes that
each of the organizations establish a distinctive mixture of values, standards, presumptions, and
practices about how things should be done that eventually becomes a habit (Kirst–Ashman, 2014).
The cultural theory is to go on with their tradition on what they are used to do. If it ain't broke, don't
fix it (Kirst–Ashman, 2014). Because of how much they are used to their way working, it becomes

The Theory Of Scientific Management Essay
Frederik Winslow Taylor, one of the most famous pioneers of management gave the theory of
Scientific management or what is now referred to as Taylorism. Scientific management or Taylorism
refers to "a form of job design which stresses short, repetitive work cycles; detailed, prescribed task
sequences; a separation of task conception from task execution; and motivation based on economic
rewards." (Huczynski & Buchanan, 2013). The applicability of Scientific management to this day is
a controversial topic as there is still debate whether scientific management is beneficial to apply to
organizations for smooth functioning or not. This paper discusses his theory of scientific
management. While it highlights the strengths and weaknesses of this theory, it mainly expands on
the criticisms of this theory and the reasons as to why the theory is not highly relevant now. This
paper does this by using theorists like Abraham Maslow, Elton Mayo & Douglas Mcgregor and by
stating modern day examples of companies with different principles of management as compared to
Taylorism.
Under Taylorism, there were clear divisions of task, that is every employee was given a particular
piece of work to do with simple and clear instructions. Simple and clear instructions meant that each
employee was explained the work to be done, the process to do it and the time period allotted for its
completion. Taylor replaced the traditional "rule of thumb" with a method of a more scientific base.
(Priestley,

The Theories Of Scientific Naturalism
In society today there are two worldviews that tend to be complete opposites, the ideas of scientific
naturalism against Christianity. These worldviews are incredibly opposite, but there may be areas
that the two opposing sides could meet on. Both views have valid ideas to contribute to the
argument. We strengthen our beliefs through ideological conflict with others. Both view–points are
strengthened when compared to each other rather than presented separately with no alternative view
to oppose it. Before we start one question needs to be answered, what is scientific naturalism and
what are our parameters for Christianity. Scientific naturalism relies heavily on scientific
observation. The view claims that everything in the universe can ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Pentecostal (e.g.keener), Orthodox (e.g.Hart,Swinburne), and Anglican (e.g.Mcgrath) Christian
worldview may disagree in certain areas but they have no difficulty coming together on key points
and in fact, have much more in common than they have in opposition. A Christian worldview
recognizes a higher power that created the universe and is present in it with the capability to
manipulate events as he pleases. This worldview also allows communication with this being. There
is an immortal soul in all of use and a supernatural non–physical place where it can reside with God
after death. The scriptures are seen as inspired by the creator God and are records of his influence
throughout history and thus are eye witness accounts of his ability to interact within his creation.
Christianity has much to work with in presenting the argument against Scientific Naturalism. A
Christian worldview can embrace science and use it to its advantage. Christianity gains the upper
hand because it can use the ideas of Scientific Naturalism but is not limited to strict scientific
method. There can be a deeper explanation for events that seem so impossible in a closed universe.
Its downfall is that it cannot remain strictly objective and empirical. It also cannot prove that an
unexplainable event took place due to manipulation from their creator. It could just as easily be
hypothesized that the Hindu god Shiva or the

Scientific Management, Or Taylorism, Is A Theory Of...
Scientific Management, or Taylorism, is a theory of management by F. W. Taylor that analysed how
the highest economic efficiency, especially labour productivity, can be achieved, hence the greatest
prosperity for both employers and employees. The four principles that he brought forward are the
replacement of the 'rule of thumb' work method with a scientific way to study work, matching and
training the most suitable person to do each particular job scientifically instead of leaving the
workers to choose their own work and teach themselves, the provision of detailed instructions and
standard operating procedures by the managers to workers to ensure "all of the work being done in
accordance with the principles of the science" and the division of work between workers and
managers, which managers are responsible for planning and supervising while workers are to
complete the tasks they are assigned to.
In F. W. Taylor's scientific management theory, he tried to convey the idea of specialisation. This
means "dividing and co–ordinating the various tasks necessary to produce a finished product" by
"simplifying jobs and having each worker perform fewer, more routine tasks", aiming to increase
efficiency in the workplace. By doing so, workers would have to make fewer motions to complete a
task and also, repeatedly doing the same task, which would make workers more and more used to
and skilled at that task. As a result, they can do it more efficiently and quicker.
Specialisation has

The Scientific Theory Of Science
Science is based on fact through the processes of falsification. It is a utility function in society and is
widely consistent with the evidence of history and practice of rational thinking. Progress in science
since the fourteenth century has been revolutionary and valuable in the methods used for rationality
and reasoning. Scientific methods that are used to establish rationality is due to the simple, general
and rigorous explanations of the phenomena, (Diamond, 1998). This essay will explore the reasons
to the extent of the role of science in reason, displaying perspectives from respected philosophers,
politicians and scientists throughout time. Politician rather than scientist, Francis Bacon (1561–
1627) was the man who made a ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
His methods were also able to revolutionise reasoning as he was against the use of knowledge that
had been inherited from the past. Following Bacon's methods, scientists and philosophers have
adopted his methods and utilised the knowledge to better the results in order to establish the truth.
Bacon's work should be seen as a part of a widespread cultural revolution accelerated by the rise of
the printing press in the 15 th century (source). Bacon believed that scientific knowledge increases
and grows. Bacon's methods of testing hypotheses was highly valuable in the movement of science
as a rational enterprise. Furthermore, scientist Rene Descartes (1596–1650) changed the world from
within the realm of practicality to reasoning through the applications of thinking rather than acting
upon or doing, "I think therefore, I am." This gave reasoning in society a far more prominent role.
Descartes is believed to have been the first philosopher to use reason in the development of the
natural sciences. He used maths and physics as his basis for reasoning in the sciences. Primarily,
Descartes had three visions in which he was certain a divine spirit had led him to reveal a new
philosophy. Descartes believed that all truths were linking together and in order to find the
fundamental truth, continuing with logic and reasoning would broaden the use of the sciences

The Scientific Management And The Human Relations Theories
This essay will be evaluating both the Scientific management and the Human relations theories in
today's management of organisations. Scientific management theory was founded and published by
Frederick Winslow Taylor in 1909 where he proposed that productivity can be increased by
augmenting and simplifying workloads which then improves 'economic efficiency' (Economist,
2009). On the other hand, Human relations theories focuses on personal factors and suggests that
motivation and leadership are the features that help encourage workers to work productively
(Dininni, 2017).
For Scientific Management Theory, one of Taylor's four principles was the rule of thumb where
managers should think and use scientific method to increase production by ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
As opposed to Taylor's scientific theory, human relations theory value the workers which leads to
increased motivation and productivity (Bianca, 2017). An example of this would be a private sector,
Google. Instead of adopting Taylor's style where there are strict rules, Google allows freedom for the
workers by letting them work when they want and allowing customisation of their own surroundings
(Garguilo, 2011). This gives them their personal freedom which in turn increases motivation to
work. Therefore, this suggests that even though Taylor diminished social factors, human relations
theory gives evidence that social factors such as freedom does affect productivity in today's
management.
Taylor suggested a piecework pay system where workers are payed according to their productivity.
Therefore, a worker with high productivity gets higher wages than those with less productivity. This
results in the motivation of the employees to work at an efficient rate which will mean greater
productivity and higher pay (Lawler, 2000). In addition, the customers are benefitted as enhanced
productivity will lead to advanced service or additional products created. This system can be applied
into a public sector such as libraries where the standards of

Essay about The Theory of Scientific Theories
The Theory of Scientific Theories
Sir Popper's piece, "Science: Conjectures and Refutations," reaffirms the scientific methods
currently in use. No scientific theory is ratified without serious consideration and careful
observation. Science is the pursuit of what can be proven false and the resulting assumptions of
what must be true.
The problem that plagues Sir Popper is the clear definition of science and pseudoscience. Though
the empirical method is common to both, the level of inferential data varies greatly. One can amass
large amounts of data by observing human behavior, but data alone is not the stuff of scientific
theory. Theories must be assembled fusing factual data, and inducive reasoning. The point of
induction seems to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
By setting out to validate an assumption, we determine the outcome of any challenge to that
assumption. Kuhn reiterates this in his works on Copernicus. Though Copernicus firmly believes
that the earth is not the center of the universe, he is hesitant to disclose his theories. He knows that
any experimentation will be done with the assumption that man is the center, and therefore
determine the outcome before experiments even begin.
The next conclusion Popper declares is that the more rigorous the testing of a theory, the stronger it
will become. During the scientific revolution, mathematicians like Kepler and astronomers like
Brahe went to great lengths to improve the accuracy of experiments. Rather than formulate volumes
of calculations, Kepler struggled to improve upon the accuracy of Copernicus' work. The fruits of
his labors were observations accurate within four degrees, and led to the theory of eliptical orbits.
Brahe, with the aid of new optical equipment such as the astrolabe, set a new standard for accurate
depiction of planetary bodies and their actions. The progression of these thoughts brings us to
another of his conclusions. Testing has degrees of accuracy which must be optimized to truly
proclaim a theory. In summary, a scientific theory must be falsifiable, refutable, and testable.
In revision of his postulates, Popper alludes to a few interesting concepts on the nature of scientific
thought. Many major scientific contributions have

Scientific Management Theory Paper
In organizational world, the management and organizational theory plays an important part in the
operations of business, companies and administrations. An organization consists of two or more
persons in a systematic effort to produce goods or services. Thus, an organization needs a
management to achieve the organizational goals through some managerial process which is an
ongoing activity. Therefore, in every organization has a manager that plays important roles as
systematic planner. According to Cleslinska (2007), managers need a knowledge base and
management skill to act out roles and plan, organize, lead and control. Generally, a lot of managers
run their organizations using the Scientific Management Theory. In this paper, I will discuss ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
According to Hasebur Rahman (2012) stated that Taylor shows the value of matching the job to the
worker. The management's duty is to study the employees carefully and not just leave it to the poor.
He also emphasized the selection proceeds years after years and need to study workers' strengths
and weaknesses and provides training to improve workers' performance. The employees must be
able to do a better class of work and pay higher wages than before (Shafritz & Ott, 1991). Taylor's
principle is to ensure the most efficient way would be use workers in order to make the standard
work process. At this point, the production process is divided into numerous divisions where this
makes managers easily to control and co–ordinate the workers' performance and to improve the
efficiency of the organization. Thus, the efficiency will increase when the work is divided into
different parts according to different functional departments and each individual should be assigned
to work according to their ability and interest rather than giving the whole process of the production
to one person (Monden,

Thunder and Early Scientific Theory Essay
Thunder and Early Scientific Theory
It lends its name to one of the most common weather phenomenon on Earth –– the thunderstorm ––
and its associated elements: the thunderhead, thunder cloud, thunder bolt, thundershower and
thunder clap. Early humans believed thunder came from the deities –– the voice and expression of
their god(s). The roster of thunder gods includes: Thor of the Scandinavians, Donar of the Germans,
Zeus of the Greeks, Jupiter of the Romans, Taranis of the Celts, Perkunis of the Slavs, Indra of the
Indians and Shango of the Nigerian Yoruba. Each is know to throw thunderbolts or bundles of
lightning at the earth while their voices reverberates across the heavens.
Many early ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They both believed that air smashing against the clouds caused thunder and, as the air struggled its
way through the clouds, it kindled a flame which was lightning.
Anaxogoras (ca 499–427 BC), however, believed that thunder resulted when fire flashing through
clouds (lightning) was quenched by the water in the cloud. Democritus (ca 460–370 BC), on the
other hand, suggested that thunder and lightning were due to the unequal mixing of particles within
clouds which caused violent motions, the resulting sound of which was thunder.
Aristotle (384–322 BC), in his series of essays entitled Meteorologica (written around 334 BC),
wrote that thunder occurs when
"the dry exhalation that gets trapped when the air is in the process of colliding is forcibly ejected as
the clouds condense and in its course strikes the surrounding clouds, and the noise caused by the
impact is what we call thunder...similarly the windy exhalations in the clouds produces thunder
when it strikes a dense cloud formation. Different kinds of sound are produced because of the lack
of uniformity in the clouds and because hollows occur where their density is not continuous."
He also wrote that, in general,
"the ejected winds burns with a fine and gentle fire and it is then what we call lightning, which
occurs when the falling wind appears to

Hypothesis vs Theory 40

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Patricia Viljoen

More from Patricia Viljoen (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Hypothesis vs Theory 40