Metaphysical Assumptions of Science!

Recently a dear cyber friend of mine, Zain Raza, forwarded me the link to his personal blog. Having promised him to provide feedback on his blog,I came across one of his posts addressing the issue of assumptions of science. This is what he had to say on this issue.

''Herein follows a list of assumptions made in accepting scientific assertions as the truth. It must be said that as far as assumptions go, these are good ones – but it is also important to document them, lest they be forgotten.

1: The assumptions of rationality

The very first assumption is in accepting that human rationality is capable of formulating true ideas on reality. This is fairly simple to see, there is no way to escape human rationality to prove its use correct or not and this would include logical language as well as mathematical formulations. Following from this:

2. The assumption of truth

If it really is possible to see reality correctly, one must assume that there is a truth to be found, in the first place.

3: The assumptions of naturalism and efficient causes

This is the assumption that cause begets effect and the further assumption that every cause is physical. David Hume quite conclusively put to rest all theories of causation as true and for the paradoxes involved in assuming the term ‘physical’ see this earlier post.

4: The assumption of verificationism

Verificationism is the idea that for any real discussion to exist around a question, the terms must be verifiable (usually, following the empiricists, the terms must be observable). Asking for a verification of the idea of verificationism proves this an assumption.''

While all of these alone are enough to make a case, together they are conclusive.

Below is my feedback on this post of Zain's.

Though by no standards I am a formal science student but I think I have earned a right to state my opinion by my reasonable self-study. Apart from the assumptions you mentioned, there are numerous others.Here are a few more

1)Assumption of progress
Strictly speaking this has nothing to do with the scientific method but none the less its the metaphysical basis of all scientific study Almost all scientist believe in progress. There is nothing wrong or absurd about this idea but by no means we can verify or falsify this metaphysical belief which lies at the heart of scientific inquiry or scientific world view.

2)Subject/Object dichotomy:
Science presupposes the existence of external world. Regards us as 'subjects' and the external reality as 'object'. Therefore the scientific 'episteme' presupposes the distinction between subject and object. Again an adherence to metaphysical position.

3)Partial study of the whole of Reality:
Science works on the basis of induction and experimentation. Therefore, it always studies a part of the whole by 'selecting' material for the experiments. Therefore, It can never give us a holistic picture of reality. However, the assumption is that we can proceed from specific to general.

On a personal note, I would have preferred the term falsification over verification but I believe Zain's critique was directed against Positivism which is quite justified as far as its merits are concerned.