David Deutsch discusses the advent of the scientific method and how it lifted humanity out of millenia of stagnation. He also points out the requirements for a "good explanation".
The Scientific method can be defined as the following:
Scientific method refers to a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.
Many believe that they understand what science is all about, and would see as almost trivial, the idea of reflecting on the scientific method. This is the case because the vast majority of the time, people do not undertstand it at all.
Unsuprisingly, most people believe that science is all about the search for the truth. This seems correct generally, but in detail, it is the opposite that gets us where we want to go.
The scientific method is not really about proving things true. Strangely, the very idea of proving something true is actually impossible. How can you be sure that what you are saying is true? It might be only partly true because you don't understand all of the influencing factors in what you are trying to explain. Maybe your explanation is adequate in certain circumstances but not in others.
What many people don't understand, is that the scientific method is actually a tool for proving things false. You make a claim (or advance a hypothesis), and then the idea is to try and prove it false. If it stands up to deep scrutiny and experiment then it is likely you are getting closer to the truth.
Taking the scientific method seriously is a statement of humility. In order to do science properly, you must to be able to admit that you are wrong, when it is shown that you are. This is very hard for the human psyche, we just don't like being wrong. Nonetheless, it is a requirement for moving forward.
Aside from the deep technical fields of science, the scientific method actually plays (or doesn't) a big role in our everyday lives. We live in an age of information, where all kinds of claims are coming at us daily from all angles. How do we find the time to make sense of it all, and determine what's true and what is not?
Well here's a list of questions to always ask to make the task easier:
Michael Shermer introduces the "Baloney Detection Kit"
There is another wonderful group in Ottawa called : Ottawa Skeptics. This group is focused on exploring radical claims that are made by people with the scientific method and critical inquiry.
Modern-day Humanists are skeptics by nature. We don't take any serious claim at face value unless there is reasonable evidence to back it up and a "hard to vary" explanation of why it occurs. This is particularly the case with claims that appeal to the super-natural, such as the existence of a god.
Critical thinking is a key ideal that we as Humanists believe is important, not only in our own lives, but also as a cherished value to pass on to our children.