Science is based on logic, yet it is also based on perception (observations) (Novak, 2005). Logic is often seen as a form of deception, a way to trick the mind into believing something without proof, whereas observations appear to be more reliable because people tend to agree that ôseeing is believing.ö However, perception is a preliminary acquisition of data without testing or evaluation applied, whereas logic is the application of reason and critical thinking to the observation. Logic is the test of accuracy and is therefore the defining basis of science.
Critical thinking helps distinguish between knowledge and belief (perception) (Low, 2004). Logic is the science of correct thinking, moving from the inference of one or more statements to other statements according to rules which determine how certain statements support those that follow from them. Knowledge is belief supported by evidence and connected to the evidence by rules of inference. Perceptions provide direct evidence, and lead to the construction of generalizations. The reliability of inductive generalizations increases with the number of observations. Analogical arguments claim that if two or more things are similar in one way, they also will be similar in other ways. However, generalizations can be inaccurate if based on two few observations, or if applied to individuals in a group without regard for their individuality, e.g. stereotypes.
Perceptions can be unreliable because of perceptual error (e.g. objects perceived at a distance), perceptual illusion (e.g. a stick appears bent where it enters water), or because people believe them through distorted beliefs and interests (Low, 2004). Perceptual errors can be reduced by using other senses; repeating observations; observing from optimal distances; having others make observations; establishing agreement with previous studies; and demonstrating the usefulness of the observations. There are several ...