The Science of Matter as World Philosophy

Instructions:    Please choose the one best answer that corresponds to you.  Please circle or otherwise mark clearly your answer on the provided answer sheet.  Thank you.

I.  Background Information

1. Which of the following categories represents your age?
A.        17 years or under
B.         18-22 years
C.         23-29 years
D.        over  30 years

2. Which of the following represents your year in college?
A.        First year
B.         Sophomore
C.         Junior
D.        Senior
E.         Graduate Student

3. What is your gender?
A.        Female
B.         Male

4. What is your religious position?

  1. Believer (I believe in the existence of God.)
  2. Agnostic (No one knows if God exists and no one can logically prove or disprove it.)
  3. Atheist (I don’t believe in the existence of God.)

5. What is your intended major in college? (please choose only one)
A.        Biological sciences (pre-medicine, nursing, biology, physical therapy, etc.)
B.         Physical sciences (physics, chemistry, engineering, etc.)
C.         Social sciences (history, economics, sociology, political science, etc.)
D.        Arts (music, studio art, graphic design, theater, etc.)
E.         Humanities (literature, philosophy, art history, foreign language, English, etc.)
F.         Other (Business, Journalism, Communication, etc.)

6. Please specify the national origin of the curriculum of the secondary school (high school, gymnasium, lycee)that you attended regardless of the country where you went to school (e.g. you may have gone to an American high school following the US curriculum in Germany):

  1. North American high school curriculum (US or Canada)
  2. Latin American high school curriculum
  3. East Asian high school curriculum (India, China, Japan, Indonesia, Korea, Vietnam, etc.)
  4. Western European school curriculum (British, French, German, Greek, Swiss, etc.)
  5. Central/Eastern European curriculum (in all former communist-block nations + USSR)

7. Please specify the subject emphasis in the curriculum that YOU followed in secondary (high) school:

  1. General Comprehensive (all subjects taught with equal emphasis)
  2. General with Humanities/Arts emphasis
  3. General with Science/Math emphasis
  4. Vocational with emphasis on technical training
  5. Vocational with emphasis on training in the arts or humanities

  8. Did you have the option to choose the number and type of science courses taken at your secondary
school (high school, lycee, gymnasium)?

  1. Yes, I myself chose the majority of science courses I took in high school.
  2. No, the majority of science courses were part of a rigid curriculum that I had to follow.

  9. How many years of chemistry did you complete at your secondary (high) school?
A.        0 years
B.         1 year
C.         2 years
D.        3 years
E.         4 or more years

10. How many years of biology did you complete at your secondary (high) school?
A.        0 years
B.         1 year
C.         2 years
D.        3 years
E.         4 or more years

11. How many years of physics did you complete at your secondary (high) school?
A.        0 years
B.         1 year
C.         2 years
D.        3 years
E.         4 or more years

12. How many years of social-science courses like history, civics, psychology or economics altogether did you complete at your secondary (high) school (WITHOUT languages, literature, philosophy)?
A.        1 year or less
B.         2 or 3 years
C.         4 or 5 years
D.        6 or 7 years
E.         8 or more years

13. How many semesters of natural-science courses (chemistry, biology, physics, etc.) altogether did you complete at your post-secondary level of education (university, college)?
A.        0 semesters
B.         1 semester
C.         2 semesters
D.        3 semesters
E.         4 semesters
F.         5 or more semesters

14. How many semesters of social-science courses (sociology, political science, economics, etc.) altogether did you complete at your post-secondary level of education (university, college)?
A.        0 semesters
B.         1 semester
C.         2 semesters
D.        3 semesters
E.         4 semesters
F.         5 or more semesters


II. The Science of Matter as World Philosophy

Instructions:    Please choose the one answer that best reflects your personal views.  Please read carefully ALL provided choices before making your selection.   Some of the answers may not fit exactly your personal preferences, however, please choose the one single answer that is closest to your own understanding.  Please circle or otherwise mark clearly your answer on the provided answer sheet. Thank you for your help.

15.  What is science in general?

  1. Science is mostly a body of knowledge – facts and concepts – about the structure and function of the world around us.
  2. Science is mostly a way of investigating the world through experimentation, observation and analysis.
  3. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

16. If God exists, are the laws of the material world subject to change according to God’s will?

  1. God has no power to change the laws of the material world.
  2. God has some power to change the laws of the material world
  3. God has total power to change the laws of the material world.
  4. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

17.  How do scientists obtain scientific knowledge?

  1. Scientists first create theories and then discover facts that support their theories. 
  2. Scientists first discover some facts and then create theories in their minds.
  3. Science knowledge may be obtained by following either of the described paths.
  4. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

18.  Is chemistry knowledge a human reflection of some universal facts and laws about the material world that exists independently from us and from our own knowledge about this world?  For example, are you convinced that the modern model of the atom does reflect the real atom that actually exists out there even though you cannot see the actual atom?

  1. Yes, because chemistry knowledge depends mostly on observations of matter.
  2. No, because chemistry knowledge depends mostly on our own human ability to observe matter. 
  3. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

19.  According to some scholars, the development of the natural sciences in Europe was the result of the use of military power by the Europeans to conquer lands overseas and of the exploitation of the natural resources of these lands.  Other scholars think that it was the European intellectual climate of reason and experimentation, which led to the successful development of European science which, in turn, contributed to the colonization of other cultures. What is your position?

  1. The development of the natural sciences in Europe was mostly the result of this colonization.
  2. This colonization was mostly the result of the development of the natural sciences in Europe. 
  3. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

20.  Is there such a thing as an undisputedly established “fact” that exists in the material world?

  1. No, there is no such thing as a “fact”.  Any fact may, upon investigation, be revised or discarded, leading to new theories.
  2. Yes, facts remain facts by definition.  New facts only add to our understanding of the material world and help scientists to modify their earlier theories.
  3. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

21.  Scientists in different parts of the world have different traditions about whataspects of the material world to investigate.  Do you believe that they also use different ways of how to investigate the same material world?  For example, scientists in China are naturally interested in finding out if a new extract obtained from an exotic tree has any medicinal powers in treating a specific disease that is common in China but is rarely seen elsewhere.  A visiting group of Brazilian scientists also received a sample of the same extract.  Do you think that the scientists working in Brazil will need to employ the same ways of thinking (experimental design and reasoned analysis) to study the medicinal benefits of this extract as the scientists working in China?

  1. Yes, they will have to employ the same ways of thinking when investigating the drug.
  2. No, they may employ different ways of thinking when investigating the same drug. 
  3. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

22.   Research chemists constantly produce new information, which they report in research journals.  This new knowledge is checked out by other chemists and is subject to change.  In the end, some of this new knowledge gets accepted as valid (accurate).  What is the effect of any new chemistry discoveries on the most basic, old knowledge, which has long been part of today’s chemistry textbooks?  For example, will some basic principles like the law of conservation of mass and the Periodic Table of elements always be valid? 

  1. No, new discoveries would change even the most basic, modern textbook concepts.
  2. Yes, new discoveries would only addto our understanding of these concepts.
  3. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

23.  Maria wonders what affects the time it takes ice cubes to melt.  She thinks that the size of the ice cubes, temperature of the room, and the shape of the ice cube are all factors that might affect the melting time.  She finally decides to test the hypothesis that the shape of an ice cube affects the time it takes to melt.  Which design should Maria select to test her hypothesis?

  1.  Use five ice cubes, each with a different shape and weight.  Use five identical containers, all at the same temperature.  Observe the melting time of the ice cubes.
  2. Use five ice cubes, all having the same shape, but each having a different weight.  Use five identical containers, all at the same temperature.  Observe the melting time of the ice cubes.
  3. Use five ice cubes, all having the same weight, but each having a different shape.  Use five identical containers, all at the same temperature.  Observe the melting time of the ice cubes.
  4. Use five ice cubes, all having the same weight, but each having a different shape.  Use five identical containers, each at a different temperature.  Observe the melting time of the ice cubes.

24.  Both genders may be equally intelligent, however, men and women by nature and upbringing, often think and act differently.  Are these gender differences important for the way chemistry is practiced?

  1. Yes, because men and women use different practices that are equally scientific. 
  2. No, because men and women use the same scientific practices.  
  3. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

25.  Does gender make a difference in the way a natural science (like chemistry) and/or a social science (like sociology) is practiced?

  1. No, the practice of both sociology and chemistry (to an equal degree) is affected significantly by the scientist’s gender.
  2. No, the practice of both sociology and chemistry (to an equal degree) is not affected significantly by the scientist’s gender.
  3. Yes, scientist’s gender affects the practice of chemistry more than it affects sociology. 
  4. Yes, scientist’s gender affects the practice of sociology more than it affects chemistry.
  5. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

26.  Knowledge is often described as objective and/or subjective.  For the purposes of this question, let us define objective knowledge as knowledge which can be demonstrated by reference to external reality (that exists out there independently from us) and subjective knowledge as knowledge which is mostly personal and cannot be so demonstrated by reference to external reality.  Is there a difference between a natural science (like chemistry) and a social science (like sociology or political science) in terms of objectivity?

  1. No, both branches of the sciences are equally objective (or subjective).  For example, in political science the decision who is a “freedom fighter” and who is a “terrorist” can be objectively demonstrated in the same manner as the decision in chemistry about what is a “poison” and what is a “drug”.
  2. Yes, the difference between a poison and a drug can be objectively demonstrated, while the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist is a matter of subjective opinion.
  3. Yes, the difference between a poison and a drug is a matter of subjective opinion, while the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist can be objectively demonstrated.
  4. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

27.  Are chemistry or sociology textbooks published in different languages in different parts of the world more likely to differ in their scientific content (nature of facts and theories presented)?

  1. Sociology textbooks are more likely to differ in their content.
  2. Chemistry textbooks are more likely to differ in their content.
  3. Both chemistry and sociology textbooks are equally likely to differ in their content.
  4. Neither chemistry nor sociology textbooks will be much different around the world.
  5. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

28.  Does the scientific way of thinking (systematic, reasoned examination of the factors that lead to a certain outcome) come naturally (instinctively) to humans?

  1. Yes, the scientific way of thinking comes naturally to most humans.
  2. No, the scientific way of thinking does not come naturally to most humans.
  3. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

29.  Scientists try to predict the outcome of certain phenomena in nature or society by studying the factors leading to this specific outcome.  For example, chemists who study a chemical reaction look for the effect of amount of material, temperature, and pressure on the outcome of this reaction. Sociologists who study the behavior of a group of people look for the effect of educational level, age, or gender on their behavior.  Are sociologists or chemists in a better position to study all the factors that affect their respective social or natural phenomena?

  1. Sociologists are better positioned to study all social factors affecting social phenomena than are chemists in their study of all natural factors. 
  2. Chemists are better positioned to study all natural factors affecting chemical reactions than are sociologists in their study of all social factors.   
  3. Both sociologists and chemists are equally well positioned to study all respective factors affecting phenomena in their respective areas of work.
  4. Neither sociologists nor chemists are able to study all respective factors affecting phenomena in their respective areas of work.
  5. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

30.  Many science concepts defy “common sense”.  Do you think that chemistry concepts contradict common sense any more (or less) than sociology concepts do?

  1. The concepts of both sociology and chemistry contradict “common sense”. 
  2. The concepts of both sociology and chemistry mostly follow “common sense”.
  3. Chemistry concepts make less “common sense” than sociology concepts.
  4. Sociology concepts make less “common sense” than chemistryconcepts.
  5. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

31.  All scientific work is based on some core theoretical assumptions about the world.  Scientific disciplines differ, however, in the extent to which there is agreement on what these theoretical assumptions should be.  Identify which of the statements below best describes the level of agreement in chemistry versus sociology:

  1. Chemists agree more than sociologists on the fundamental theories of their discipline.
  2. Chemists and sociologists have the same level of agreement on the fundamental theories of their respective discipline.
  3. Sociologists agree more than chemists on the fundamental theories of their discipline.
  4. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

32.  For years, doctors believed in the paradigm (conceptual view) that the development of ulcers is related to increased acidity of the stomach juice.  Recently, scientists discovered that bacterial infection actually plays a more important role in the development of ulcers.  Therefore, there was a shift in the treatment of those patients from antacids to antibiotics.   How did this paradigm shift come about? 

  1. Scientists focused on the weaknesses of the old paradigm trying to disprove it by designing studies that challenged its claim that acidity leads to ulcer. 
  2. Scientists focused on the strengths of the old paradigm trying to prove it by designing studies that supported its claim that acidity leads to ulcer.
  3. Both of the above-described approaches would lead to the discovery of the role of bacteria in the development of ulcers.
  4. Neither of the above-described approaches would lead to the discovery of the role of bacteria in the development of ulcers.  It is a matter of luck to make this discovery.
  5. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

33.  When conducting their research, are chemists or social scientists more dependent on institutional support (e.g. team-work, funding, instrumentation)?  For example, a sociologist would like to study the connection between the frequency of the AIDS infection and the sexual behavior of the members of a specific ethnic group.  At the same time, a biochemist is interested in the synthesis of a new molecule that may be used in the fight against the AIDS infection. Which one of these two scientists is more dependent on institutional support in the pursuit of his/her individual research interests?

  1. The practice of sociology requires more institutional support.
  2. Practices of both sociology and chemistry require an equal amount of institutional support.
  3. The practice of chemistry requires more institutional support.
  4. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

34.  Does the practice of chemistry lead to any more clear-cut results than the practice of sociology?  For example (question 33), is the sociologists’ ability or inability to relate the spread of AIDS to particular sexual behaviors any more clear-cut than the biochemist’s successful or unsuccessful synthesis?

  1. Research results obtained by chemists are less clear-cut. 
  2. Research results obtained by both sociologists and chemists are equally clear-cut. 
  3. Research results obtained by sociologists are less clear-cut.
  4. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

35.  Assume that the results of both the biochemical and the sociological study in question 33 contradicted earlier results of other equally rigorous scientific studies in the same respective areas of research.  Would the scientific community of biochemists or the scientific community of sociologists be more likely to accept as valid (accurate) the results of two opposing studies?

  1. The biochemists are more likely to accept only one of the two conflicting results.
  2. The sociologists are more likely to accept only one of the two conflicting results.
  3. Both scientific communities will accept only one of the two conflicting results.
  4. Both scientific communities will accept more than one of the conflicting results.
  5. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

36.  Which modern scientific concepts are understood more naturally (instinctively) by humans, those of chemistry or those of sociology?

  1. People comprehend more naturally chemistry rather than sociology concepts.
  2. People comprehend more naturally sociology rather than chemistry concepts.
  3. Comprehension of both chemistry and sociology concepts comes naturally.
  4. Comprehension of neither chemistry nor sociology concepts comes naturally.
  5. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

37.  How different are chemistry writings from other forms of creative literature (like novels)?

  1. Chemistry writings are not much different from literature writings because chemists (like other writers) subjectively develop their ideas about matter.
  2. Chemistry writings are significantly different from literature writings because chemists’ writings are based on testable observations (measurements).
  3. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

38.  The structure of scientific knowledge is described both as “hierarchical” (scientific concepts are interdependent, built one on top of the other) and/or “horizontal” (scientific concepts are independent and they add next to each other).   One example of the hierarchical structure of knowledge is the fact that college catalogs often require a specific sequential order for taking college classes in one discipline.  Is chemistry or sociology knowledge structured more hierarchically?

  1. Sociology knowledge is structured in a more hierarchical manner.
  2. Chemistry knowledge is structured in a more hierarchical manner.
  3. Both chemistry and sociology are structured in an equally hierarchical manner.
  4. Neither chemistry nor sociology concepts are structured in a hierarchical manner.
  5. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

39.  A female chemist and her male counterpart (with the same education and lab skills) obtained different results in their work on the same project and/or interpreted their results differently.  Do you think that gender or individual differences are more important for explaining their disagreement? 

  1. The differences between women and men are more important.
  2. The differences between both scientists as individuals are more important.
  3. Both gender and individual differences are equally important.
  4. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

40.  Is the practice of chemistry in conflict with religious beliefs?

  1. No, because any chemistry knowledge is actually a divine revelation beyond human control.
  2. No, because even though the whole world is divine, any chemistry knowledge actually results from our own human reasoning ability to understand this world.
  3. No, because chemistry and religion are two different yet compatible ways of knowing about the world that are independent of each other.  Chemistry studies the material structure of life and religion the non-material, the meaning of life.
  4. Yes, science is in conflict with religion because science is based on questioning and reason while religion is based on acceptance and belief. 
  5. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

41.  Is chemistry just another way of knowing about the material world that is no more valid (accurate) than literature?  For example, is a literary essay about the beauty of a volcano equally valid as a chemistry article describing the workings of the same volcano?

  1. The chemistry article is more valid than the article about the beauty of the volcano.
  2. The article about the beauty of the volcano is more valid than the chemistry article.
  3. Both articles are equally valid or invalid.
  4. For various reasons, I am unable to form an opinion at this point.

III. The Science of Matter and Society

Instructions:  Please review the following statements (numbered 42 through 52) and indicate on the answer sheet your level of agreement with each one of them.  Please mark the letters

SA       if you strongly agree with the statement
TA       if you tend to agree with the statement
U         if you feel that for various reasons you are unable to form a definite opinion
TD       if you tend to disagree with the statement
SD       if you strongly disagree with the statement 

 

  1. Chemistry together with the other natural sciences, can in principle explain anything about the material world.
  2. We depend too much on science and not enough on faith.
  3. There are too many potential harmful results of nuclear power that do not justify using nuclear power for generation of electricity.
  4. In the long run, humanity would do better by living a simpler life without the numerous chemistry discoveries and the technology that create an artificial way of life.
  5. Overall, chemistry inventions and discoveries have done more harm than good to humankind.
  6. The potential harmful results of the development of new drugs outweigh (are more numerous than) the benefits of these drugs. 
  7. The benefits of genetic engineering outweigh (are more numerous than) the potential harmful side-effects.
  8. Biochemists should be allowed to do research that causes pain and injury to animals like rats or dogs if it produces new information about human health problems.
  9. Faith and/or prayer are futile (meaningless) exercises in treating diseases like cancer or flu. 
  10. Chemistry discoveries and related technological (including medical) advances usually make life healthier, easier, and more comfortable.
  11. Biochemists should not be allowed the freedom to perform research on whatever problems they wish (like manipulation of human DNA and cloning of humans).