ABSTRACT
Observation occupies a central role in the methodology of the natural sciences. Indeed, for positivist philosophers, scientific knowledge is distinguished from other more common-sense, traditional forms of knowledge because it is based upon empirical observations rather than blind acceptance of unsupported authority. The idea that the truth of statements of fact should be checked against observations is, according to Bertrand Russell ‘an entirely modern conception, which hardly existed before the seventeenth century’ (1976: 17). He continues:
Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men; although he was twice married, it never occured to him to verify this statement by examining his wives’ mouths…. When Galileo’s telescope revealed Jupiter’s moons, the orthodox refused to look through it, because they knew there could not be such bodies, and therefore the telescope must be deceptive. Respect for observation as opposed to tradition is difficult…. Science insists upon it, and this insistence was the source of the most desperate battles between science and authority.
(Russell 1976: 17–19)