“FAAA welfare-assessment models are based on scientific evidence”
Scientific Evidence
What is it? Why is it important?
What is it?
“Scientific evidence” is something that furnishes proof of the nature of a phenomenon based on exercising the scientific method. It establishes scientific truths. Scientific method refers to a body of techniques for objective investigation and acquisition of new knowledge about the natural world. It also involves correction and integration of previous knowledge, based on empirical, measurable observations, subject to laws of reasoning.
Objectivity is scientific; characteristic of human-sensible experience; independent of individual thought; perceptible by all observers. Subjectivity is unscientific; a suppositious form of reality that is modifiable by individual observer bias rather than being independent of mind.
James Randi: “Science is best defined as a careful, disciplined, logical search for knowledge ... obtained by examination of the best available evidence and always subject to correction and improvement upon discovery of better evidence. What’s left is magic. And it doesn’t work.”
Albert Einstein: "The right to search for truth implies also a duty; one must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true."
The scientific method is the best way yet discovered for winnowing truth from falseness, from delusion and illusion. Jose Wudka offered the following simple outline of the scientific method:
1) Observe some aspect of nature
2) Invent a tentative description—called a hypothesis—that is consistent with what you have observed
3) Use the hypothesis to make predictions
4) Test those predictions by experiments or further observations, and then modify the hypothesis according to the results
5) Repeat steps 3 and 4 till there is no discrepancy between hypothesis and experimental results, observations, or both
When consistency is obtained, the hypothesis becomes a theory that provides a coherent set of propositions explaining a natural phenomenon. The scientist is obliged to share complete documentation of data and methods with fellow scientists for their careful scrutiny and forthright criticism. Once a theory has been formulated and accepted by other scientists, it can serve as a framework within which observations are explained, predictions made, and practical applications based.
The cardinal feature of scientific evidence is that it is unprejudiced. Conclusions drawn from results of exercising the scientific method will hold irrespective of the investigator’s state of mind, philosophical persuasion, or state of consciousness.
Of course, human beliefs, ethical values, opinions, and viewpoints are just as real as scientific truths. But such beliefs—although real—are not necessarily truths. Ross Konig commented: “The scientific method is based upon evidence rather than belief. This distinguishes science from faith. A scientist is suitably skeptical of anything but good evidence. That’s not to say that scientists lack faith. It’s just that faith for them operates in a different sphere of their lives. In scientific work, there’s little room for faith. In life, there’s plenty of room for both.”
So faith—defined as belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence—does not determine whether a proposed theory will be adopted. A theory is accepted, not based on the prestige or convincing powers of its proponent (i. e., the logical fallacy argumentum ad verecundiam), but on the results obtained through scientific observations or experiments that anyone can reproduce. In other words, results obtained using the scientific method are repeatable. In fact, most experiments and observations are repeated many times in one way or another before a new piece of scientific evidence is granted the status of accepted theory and then recommended for widespread application.
Why is it important?
Biologically and morally sound animal-husbandry practices should be scientifically informed. They should be based on generally accepted evidence that is objective rather than on a collection of individual suppositions that are subjective. Unfounded standards may not be in the animals’ best interests.
Ethics and human feelings should serve as some of the prime drivers of our concerns for the welfare of farm animals. But only science should guide us as we heed those obligations and seek and then employ the truth about farm-animal state of being. “What’s left is magic. And it doesn’t work.” To achieve the highest animal state of being we know how to achieve, it is essential that farm-animal welfare-assessment instruments be based on scientific evidence.
FAAA
Box 41 Urbana IL 61803
217-344-4811
|
