Although human science is generally known as less “scientific” because not all variables can be controlled, it is far from the smallest of the two spheres of knowledge. But because of this additional “human factor,” the results of human scientific experiments generally have a larger deviation from the average. This means more testing and larger sampling sizes to overcome this disadvantage. Is there a difference between differences of opinion in the humanities and sciences? Some theories in the humanities are alleged, without any way to refute it. Differences of opinion in the humanities tend to create a dead end because none of the ideas can be refuted. The impasse can only be resolved through “popularity contests.” It`s easy to prove it in politics. Politicians say their policies are the best for the United States. As there is no way to refute them, they are usually chosen based on how they are viewed by the public. Differences of opinion can arise between two scientists and their theories or ideas, which is constructive because it allows for mutual assistance to improve their hypotheses. But some scientific disagreements can be unconstructive.

A “loser” may undergo small changes to provide better adaptation to the evidence. The theories could be defeated now, but come out later as new winners. As a scientist, I understand that I should not always trust the current paradigms of science. I learned that a century ago, we didn`t think we could land on the moon. In retrospect, this belief was absurd. We found ourselves on the Moon sixty-six years after the Wright Brothers. That`s why, as a student, I like to create differences of opinion on scientific concepts. Why don`t scientists agree at all? A number of possible causes focus on the experts themselves. One or more of the experts may, because of incompetence, claim imprecisely (i.e., they are not experts at all [5]) and/or the fundamental limits of human judgment [6] or have, deliberately or not, made claims based on attitudes, beliefs or personal interests [7]. Another source of expertise could be the diversity of methodological choices resulting from the skills or preferences of individual researchers or historical developments in their respective fields or sub-disciplines. Alternatively, differences of opinion among experts in scientific fields may be due to the irreducible uncertainty of the world itself and can be understood as part of the normal scientific process [8, 9]. From this point of view, it is inevitable that experts will be divided if they face complex and uncertain real problems.

It is the complexity and inherent precariousness of the world that cause differences of opinion on how to conceive of problems, research methods to be used, etc. From a conceptual point of view, these different reasons, close to the world and the world, are neither logically nor practically mutually exclusive. There may be several causes for each dispute between scientists, and these cases may vary from person to person. However, this is the perception of the causes or causes of such disputes. Creighton “If we age because after each replication, our cells cut off the ends of our DNA, how can we produce sperm and eggs that create a baby with young DNA?” This issue has given rise to a class debate on theories of aging. Although there were many disagreements, I found myself at the end of the school period to better understand the process of aging and cell division.