A Comparison of the Working Methods of Natural Science, Social Science, and Religion from the Perspective of the Philosophy of Science

Abstract

This research aims to compare the workings of natural sciences, social sciences, and religious studies from the perspective of the philosophy of science. The comparison focuses on fundamental aspects: the method of seeking truth and the characteristics of the resulting truth. Natural sciences study physical reality and empirical phenomena that are objective and exist independently of the observer. The approach follows the scientific method, which includes structured observation, hypothesis formulation, and controlled experiments. The truth in natural sciences is considered relative, as scientific theories are continuously tested and refined. In contrast, social sciences deal with highly complex and subjective objects of study: human beings and society. Truth in social sciences is often contextual and varied, reflecting the multiple interpretations of social reality. Philosophy views social sciences as aligning with an ontological approach that describes the nature of individual social reality, reinforced by an epistemological foundation that explains the nature of knowledge about reality, from how knowledge is acquired to its validity. Religious studies, on the other hand, have a transcendental object, which goes beyond ordinary physical experience. The method is based on revelation and faith, where truth is considered to come from an absolute divine source. The search for truth is carried out through the interpretation of sacred texts and spiritual experience, not through empirical observation or experimentation. Consequently, the truth in religious studies is seen as dogmatic and absolute, not subject to scientific evidence.