0
Usually, science is reasoned deductively, through an initial hypothesis posed upon an inquiry. So, yes, and no. If you're writing a paper and working with the inquiry itself, then you're using a more philosophical and inductive approach, rather than a scientific one. Although, they frequently fuse together to become one of the same.
Wiki User
∙ 9y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What would be the first step in the scientific method?
The first step in any scientific inquiry is pose a question.
Any problem of inquiry can be proved or disproved using the scientific method?
true
When properly conducted the scientific method can ultimately prove or disprove any problem of inquiry.?
thue
How does scientific inquiry try to avoid the common pitfalls that produce error in nonscientific inquiry?
Scientific inquiry attempts to avoid bias, prejudice, falsification of data, oversimplification, dishonesty of any type, superstition, etc. The investigator attempts to observe things as they are, rather than trying to force the observation to fit the theory.
Does scientific inquiry often begin by drawing a conclusion?
No... scientific inquiry begins by coming up with a question. From there you develop a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, alter your hypothesis if need be, test again, etc. Only after you have data that supports your hypothesis (if it ever does) do you draw any conclusions. If your data consistently does not support your hypothesis, no matter how it is modified, you may draw conclusions about your basic contentions as well. YES BUT..... what should you ask yourself in drawing a conclusion about an experiment?
Can scientific inquiry be constructed about any scientific question?
No. There are questions whose possible answers can't be tested by experiment, and are therefore not answerable by scientific means. The classic one, though not the only one by far, is the question of the existence of God.
Could you investigate this through scientific inquiry?
Yes, almost any question can be investigated though scientific inquiry.
Can a scientific inquiry be constructed about any questions?
No. There are questions whose possible answers can't be tested by experiment, and are therefore not answerable by scientific means. The classic one, though not the only one by far, is the question of the existence of God.
What is always involved in a scientific inquiry?
Any scientific inquiry necessarily involves observation and reasoning.
Scientific inquiry definition?
The National Science Education Standards define scientific inquiry as "the diverse ways in which scientists study the natural world and propose explanations based on the evidence derived from their work. Scientific inquiry also refers to the activities through which students develop knowledge and understanding of scientific ideas, as well as an understanding of how scientists study the natural world." DEPENDS ON GRADE LEVLE
What would be the first step in the scientific method?
The first step in any scientific inquiry is pose a question.
Any problem of inquiry can be proved or disproved using the scientific method?
true
What questions can't be answered through scientific inquiry?
Unfalsifiable questions. What this means is that if a question cannot be proven wrong by any means, then science cannot provide any answers about it.
When properly conducted the scientific method can ultimately prove or disprove any problem of inquiry.?
thue
Letter of inquiry is a term for any letter?
that asks a question or asks for information
How does scientific inquiry try to avoid the common pitfalls that produce error in nonscientific inquiry?
Scientific inquiry attempts to avoid bias, prejudice, falsification of data, oversimplification, dishonesty of any type, superstition, etc. The investigator attempts to observe things as they are, rather than trying to force the observation to fit the theory.
Does scientific inquiry often begin by drawing a conclusion?
No... scientific inquiry begins by coming up with a question. From there you develop a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, alter your hypothesis if need be, test again, etc. Only after you have data that supports your hypothesis (if it ever does) do you draw any conclusions. If your data consistently does not support your hypothesis, no matter how it is modified, you may draw conclusions about your basic contentions as well. YES BUT..... what should you ask yourself in drawing a conclusion about an experiment?
