letmeexplain
If your issues are on the table, then it would be apparent that empirical evidence would trump theory, if the theory on the table were not proven to be true. If the theory were proven to be true, and the empirical evidence does not agree with the theory, then more experimentation would be necessary to determine the validity of the theory.
Most sciences require empirical evidence (that which is gained from physical interaction and observation), philosophy does not. While empirical evidence effects philosophy. philosophy does not impact the empirical sciences (Chemistry, Biology, etc...)
Empirical evidence refers to data or observations collected through direct experience or observation, while critical thinking involves analyzing, evaluating, and interpreting information to form well-reasoned judgments and decisions. Empirical evidence provides the raw material for critical thinking to process and make sense of, allowing for more informed and rational conclusions to be drawn.
Both comparative ideological and empirical reasoning have their own value depending on the context. Comparative ideological reasoning can provide insights into philosophical and normative questions, while empirical reasoning offers concrete evidence and data to analyze real-world outcomes. The choice between the two may depend on the specific question being addressed and the available evidence.
An analytic proposition is a statement that is true by definition or through the meanings of the words used. It does not require empirical evidence to be proven. In contrast, a synthetic proposition is a statement that requires empirical evidence or observation to be proven true or false.
i know that this is stupid but how do scientists get empirical evidence.
the scientists had empirical evidence waiting to be answered
Empirical evidence refers to information that is gained through observation, experience, or experimentation. It is data that is collected from direct observations or experiences, rather than through theoretical reasoning or speculation. Empirical evidence is considered valuable in scientific research and decision-making because it provides reliable and verifiable information.
The opposite of empirical evidence is anecdotal evidence. Empirical evidence is based on direct observation, experimentation, or measurement, while anecdotal evidence relies on personal stories or experiences. Anecdotal evidence is often considered less reliable than empirical evidence because it is subjective and can be influenced by biases or individual perspectives.
Empirical evidence is a source of knowledge acquired by means of observation or experimentation. The term comes from the Greek word for experience, Εμπειρία.
The opposite of empirical evidence is anecdotal evidence, which is based on personal accounts or hearsay rather than systematic observation or experimentation.
dcdecdc
An example of empirical evidence would be, reading a thermometer. No matter who observes it the thermometer still displays the same temperture.
Empirical scientific evidence is the opposite of anecdotal evidence. Empirical scientific evidence is that evidence garnered through the use of strict "scientific method"; while anecdotal is usually based on opinion or personal, unprovable or unrepeatable experience. Example: UFO are believed to exist primarily because of anecdotal evidence rather than empirical evidence.
jews
Empirical evidence is based on direct observation or experience rather than theory or logic. It is verifiable through experimentation or observation and can be used to support or refute hypotheses. Empirical evidence is often used in scientific research to make conclusions based on real-world data.
true