Editing Fact (section)

==In science==
{{Further|Scientific method|Philosophy of science}}

The definition of a ''scientific fact'' is different from the definition of fact, as it implies [[knowledge]]. A scientific fact is the result of a repeatable careful observation or measurement by experimentation or other means, also called [[empirical evidence]]. These are central to building [[scientific theories]]. Various forms of observation and measurement lead to fundamental questions about the [[scientific method]], and the scope and validity of [[Philosophy of science|scientific reasoning]].

In the most basic sense, a ''scientific fact'' is an objective and verifiable observation, in contrast with a ''[[hypothesis]]'' or ''[[Scientific theory|theory]]'', which is intended to explain or interpret facts.<ref name="Gower">{{Cite book |last=Gower |first=Barry |title=Scientific Method: A Historical and Philosophical Introduction |publisher=Routledge |year=1997 |isbn=0-415-12282-1}}</ref>

Various [[scholars]] have offered significant refinements to this basic formulation. Philosophers and scientists are careful to distinguish between: 1) ''states of affairs'' in the external world and 2) ''assertions'' of fact that may be considered relevant in scientific analysis. The term is used in both senses in the philosophy of science.<ref name="Ravetz000">{{cite book
| title     = Scientific Knowledge and Its Social Problems
| first     = Jerome Raymond
| last      = Ravetz
| publisher = Transaction Publishers
| year      = 1996
| isbn        = 1-56000-851-2
}}</ref>

Scholars and clinical researchers in both the social and natural sciences have written about numerous questions and theories that arise in the attempt to clarify the fundamental nature of scientific fact.<ref name="Gower"/> Pertinent issues raised by this inquiry include:
* the process by which "established fact" becomes recognized and accepted as such;<ref name="Ravetz000"/>{{rp|182 fn. 1}}
* whether and to what extent "fact" and "theoretic explanation" can be considered truly independent and separable from one another;<ref name="Ravetz000"/>{{rp|185}}<ref name="Gower"/>{{rp|138}}
* to what extent "facts" are influenced by the mere act of observation;<ref name="Gower"/>{{rp|138}} and
* to what extent factual conclusions are influenced by history and consensus, rather than a strictly systematic methodology.<ref name="Gower"/>{{rp|7}}

Consistent with the idea of [[confirmation holism]], some scholars assert "fact" to be necessarily "theory-laden" to some degree. [[Thomas Kuhn]] points out that knowing what facts to measure, and how to measure them, requires the use of other theories. For example, the age of [[fossils]] is based on [[radiometric dating]], which is justified by reasoning that radioactive decay follows a [[Poisson process]] rather than a [[Bernoulli process]]. Similarly, [[Percy Williams Bridgman]] is credited with the methodological position known as [[operationalism]], which asserts that all observations are not only influenced, but necessarily defined, by the means and assumptions used to measure them.{{Citation needed|date=July 2021}}

===The scientific method===

Apart from the fundamental inquiry into the nature of scientific fact, there remain the practical and social considerations of how fact is investigated, established, and substantiated through the proper application of the scientific method.<ref name="Ravetz000"/>{{rp|181 ff}} Scientific facts are generally believed independent of the observer: no matter who performs a scientific experiment, all observers agree on the outcome.<ref name="The Nature of Suffering and the Goals of Medicine">Cassell, Eric J. [https://books.google.com/books?id=K1kjFYrliTMC&dq=%22scientific+fact&pg=PA181 The Nature of Suffering and the Goals of Medicine] ''[[Oxford University Press]]''. Retrieved 16 May 2007.</ref>
In addition to these considerations, there are the social and institutional measures, such as peer review and accreditation, that are intended to promote ''factual accuracy'' among other interests in scientific study.<ref name="Ravetz000"/>