During this time of the Covid-19 pandemic, all have been heard about these two words, and they are present in our daily lives – science and truth. In fact, what remained and emerged from this whole discourse was the great, almost generalized ignorance regarding both truth and science. Through these conversations through the media, as well as social networks or in the bar or the kitchen, we can see what is taught in our schools. Or they are not taught. Or we have a vision of science from the nineteenth century.

In general, what appears, to a large extent, is the still-enlightened positivist vision of the founders of our republic. As we know, it was a small group of positivists associated with the head of French positivism, Auguste Comte (1798-1857). He proposed positivism which, in addition to being a philosophy of life, was also a positivist religion, with its own temples and cults. A natural religion, without any opening to the infinite, the absolute, the transcendent. Everything is solved on the globe, in nature.

Almost a large portion, if not all, of our schools follow this scholarly view. When the only possible knowledge is scientific, only what science has proven is true (true). All other modes of knowledge (folk knowledge, common sense, philosophical, theological …) are nothing more than “opinions” or myths. Of course, there are good and good exceptions in our group of schools.

The Brazilian absorbed this well, even in his purchases. For example, if the advertisement says or says on the product: “You can use it because it is scientifically proven…”. This sounds like dogma. It gives certainty and begins to use it without embarrassment because it has the backing of science.

In this sociocultural environment, frank and honest dialogue becomes difficult. The reason, in my view, is simple because the basis for how science works is lacking. In other words, there is a lack of knowledge of the principles that govern the making of science or simply a little of the philosophy of science.

Of all who talk a lot about truth and science he has knowledge about: the philosophical foundations of science; Deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning. Theories and facts. social environment impact models; science making; the limits and powers of science; Finally, what is scientific truth? Without knowing this reality, a fruitful dialogue cannot be maintained.

Finally, I remember that the central nuclear problem of science is the truth, and it is not a scientific problem, but a philosophical one. Although the ultimate goal or goal of scientific research is to discover the truth, this unfortunately eludes them. It will cease to be a science, philosophy or theology.