ABSTRACT
The formal study of the philosophy of science had its origins in the writings of the early Greek philosophers, who attempted to fit a logical structure and method of observation to the study of nature. Over the centuries, as layer upon layer of scientific discoveries were built upon those early naturalistic observations, questions about the nature of the sciences themselves arose. Human-eye observation of leaves, clouds, and body parts was superseded by microscopic and macroscopic methods of observation, the red blood cell and the craters on the moon became accessible to the appropriately equipped observer. Moreover, with this accessibility came questions about the nature of the laws governing the objects and processes observed at these different levels. Do, for example, the same laws of physics apply to a brain cell and a spacecraft? Can you logically use the same kinds of scientific terms, in this case, the terms of physics, to give satisfactory explanation of both objects? If the answer you decide upon is “yes”, then you are arguing for the philosophical position known as Reductionism. If, on the other hand, you say “no”, then you are faced with the responsibility of defining the extra level of explanation that is required. This is not an easy task.
