Can we really trust our senses to tell the truth? The following assessment represents how the Scientific Method would have answered this hypothesis 'before' and 'after' the advent of technology.

Hypothesis: I theorize that the Earth might be flat

Our hypothesis appears to be acceptable in that it doesn't make any unsupported assumptions that do not extend from what is currently supported by the Scientific Method (the Scientific Method strongly supports the existence of the Earth). So now that we have a qualifying hypothesis, we need to accumulate evidence to determine the validity of it.

Color Table:

Strong counter-evidence	Weak counter-evidence	Not useful	Weak evidence	Good evidence	Strong evidence	Not applicable

First-hand Evidence
Type of Evidence	Our instincts consider this to be..	Before technology, the Scientific Method considered this to be..	Using technology, the Scientific Method considers this to be..
Tangibility The Earth appears to be flat	..perfectly convincing. For most of human history, it was firmly believed the Earth was flat, to the point that the round-Earth heretics were punished for their theories.	..really convincing. Without technology, we're quite limited in our ability to test the information that our raw senses receive.	..largely disproved. At first we used mathematics to predict that the Earth was round, and eventually we had the technology to observe the round Earth from high orbit, making the hypothesis' accuracy nearly zero (but still always leaving room for error..).
Influence It's the strangest thing...we can watch ships sailing over the horizon, but rather than them shrinking in visible size down to nothing as we would expect, they tend to get 'lower' and drop out of sight first. Yet, when one pursues that ship to join it once again, they did not sink, and the Earth still appears flat in all directions from this vantage point.	..a confusing illusion, but that shouldn't affect that the Earth is flat	..a clue that perhaps our flat Earth theory might need some work	..the beginning of the end of the flat Earth theory. It was an easy extrapolation from this observation that the Earth may be round, and once the round Earth theory was tested with technology, the flat Earth theory was virtually disproved.
Interpretation Looks pretty flat..	..common sense. How could it be round and still look flat? Don't be daft.	..compelling. Until we have more data, the Earth is probably flat.	..grossly incorrect. After determining the size of the Earth, we've learned that it is so large that when we observe it while standing on its surface, it appears to be flat.
Intuition The Earth must be flat.	..indisputable	..the most likely answer.	..virtually completely wrong, now that we have new data thanks to our technology.
Desire Flat or not, I don't care either way.	..not applicable since no emotions are involved.	..not applicable since no emotions are involved.	..not applicable since no emotions are involved.

Second-Hand Information Credibility
Type of Information	Our instincts consider this to be..	Before technology, the Scientific Method considered this to be..	Using technology, the Scientific Method considers this to be..
Distinguished Source Back in those days, all leading and recognized establishments were advocates of the flat-Earth theory.	..very convincing. If the highest authorities say it must be true, then why argue?	..not very useful since the Scientific Method didn't exist back then.	..not very useful since the Scientific Method didn't exist back then.
Agenda Source No source has anything to gain from whether I believe in the flat-Earth theory or not.	..not applicable.	..not applicable.	..not applicable.
Mass Support Everyone used to believe in the flat-Earth theory	..extremely reliable.	..not reliable. The popular adoption of the flat-Earth theory by the masses, doesn't necessarily add any merit to the theory.	..not reliable. The popular adoption of the flat-Earth theory by the masses, doesn't necessarily add any merit to the theory.
Hearsay, Rumor, or Opinion My neighbor went on a journey and when he returned, he said that the Earth was quite flat.	..fairly compelling. He travels a lot.	..not reliable. Without additional evidence, the neighbor's opinion doesn't have much credibility.	..not reliable. Without additional evidence, the neighbor's opinion doesn't have much credibility.

Wow, the instincts completely steered us wrong on this hypothesis. If it wasn't for the Scientific Method and technology, we'd all most likely still be professing the 'flatness' of the Earth. Still, before technology was available to us, even the Scientific Method was unable to accurately determine the nature of the Earth, and initially assigned it a fair likelihood that the Earth is indeed flat! The Scientific Method is only as accurate as the data it is fed. That being said however, eventually our technology advanced enough such that we had more data about the nature of Earth, and once we reapplied the Scientific Method to the original hypothesis, adding the new data, we were finally able to dispel the flat-Earth theory as virtually impossible (but still leaving a microscopic room for error). This should demonstrate that new evidence can 'change' the outcome of the Scientific Method, so it's important to always leave room for error.

Instinctual Conclusion

The Earth is flat.

Before technology Scientific Method Conclusion

Fairly convincing that the Earth is flat, but there are some observations (the sinking ships) that cannot be explained so there might be a better theory.

With technology Scientific Method Conclusion

We now understand why the Earth appears flat from the surface, it's huge!

© BetterHuman.org