THE METHOD OF ARGUMENT

The Method of Argument ~ 95 ~ follows from experiments and observations can be just as well accepted as established scientific facts as those facts, which come directly or indirectly under our observation. The statement is, nevertheless, debatable. Sir Arthur Keith, who is himself a staunch supporter of organic evolution, did not regard the theory of evolution either as an empirical or inferential fact, but as ‘a basic dogma of rationalism’.7 A reputed Encyclopaedia on Science describes Darwinism as a theory based on ‘explanation without demonstration.’ Why is it, then, that an unobservable, and nondemonstrable process is accepted as a scientific fact? Mander writes that it is because: a) it is consistent with all known facts; b) it enables scientists to explain vast multitudes of facts which are otherwise inexplicable. c) it is the only theory devised which is consistent with the facts (p.112).