Consequently, scientific theories must be continuously revised, expanded, or even replaced. This characteristic is not a flaw but rather the cornerstone of the scientific method’s success.
Those are my favorite sentences. I like what you and AI wrote. It would make a nice preface to a book. I want to add more, e.g. about reproducibility of experiments, and requiring falsifiability of hypotheses, but I’ll save it for other chapters.
I did make up an analogy to bodies of science (i.e. disciplines) continuously self-improving. They are rough sculptures, being shaped and reshaped into forms that increasingly accurately represent the reality of nature.
Hmm, I’m maybe 80% happy with that last paragraph. So I asked AI to reword it and got:
“I likened scientific disciplines to evolving sculptures, constantly being shaped and refined. These rough forms are continuously molded to more accurately represent the intricate realities of nature, with each iteration bringing them closer to truth.”
Yeah, that’s more than 20% better.