What is truth? What is the truth? What is scientific thinking and does it automatically lead to a truth or the truth or the truths? Can truth or truths be found? Do we need to know the truth? … The amount of connected questions increases proportional with the amount of time you spend on finding an answer to the main question. This is because there are so many assumptions in this concept. Therefore a need of defining key words occurs. Though defining terms is very central it is highly problematical and difficult.
After thinking of what the most important concepts in this question might be and deciding on truth and science, I interpreted truth as a temporarily not falsified concept or idea with respect to certain factors. These factors include among others factors time, cultural background, language, skills, gender, age, etc. Science, or better natural sciences, such as biology, chemistry and physics, are based on the same truth principle: elimination of the falsified ideas.
The combination of the truth and science ideas could be compared to the process of peeling an orange – to eliminate or peel off the falsified and obtain the sweet core, the truth. But because the truth finding process is a continuous one, the truth of the truths can not be ever obtained because it is always possible that the time comes or another factor changes and the truth becomes a truth – and you still did not reach the core. So do actually need then to satisfy the human desire of finding the truth?
On one hand we can not satisfy this desire practically, but on the other hand truth and science play a major role in our every day life (even if we would just write down a list of all the science we believed and trusted today, it would several pages long), since human beings are based on their beliefs, we are satisfied if we at least try. This is why science interferes with “scienceless” subjects such as history, arts and religion, too.
One point of view is that there is a lot of science for example in the arts: our perception of paintings that follow the golden section principle, beauty, or music scales seem harmonic, but can be seen as pure mathematical concepts. In History sciences help us to kind of underpin theories or finding of past times. Sciences can also explain why we feel in a certain way, why we are deciding to go a certain spiritual way or try to disprove religion.
Contrary to this one might say that the arts are created by a much more complex and mysterious inspirational way, religious truth is something that exceeds the human imaginary boundaries and that the historical truth could also not correspond perfectly with the scientific truth, but still be true for historical reasons. That is then the point in scientific truth? Let us take a closer look at the scientific truth obtaining method: First you observe experimental data, come to an inductive hypothesis and then carry out an experiment to test your predictions for qualitative and quantitative values.
Either your prediction is right and your thesis is accepted (by other imperfect human scientific beings) or falsified and the process continues starting again with observing experimental data. Seems to be too clear and transparent in the first place, but there are also clearly a lot of problems, limitations and uncertainties connected to this process: paradigms and categories can distort your observation and are influenced by knowledge, language, culture, gender, age, etc. Moreover there can be a lack in creativity and induction be present.
As well as falsification is an almost unbreakable vicious circle. To conclude: I am not able to answer this question adequately in my point of view, because no concept is just black and white as discussed above, contains errors and limitations, hence there are partial truths which may count as the truth after combination, so that I just can say that I need so many other mentioned and not mentioned concepts that I do not know how to do justice to this complex question since there are so many paradoxes.