The philosophy of science, as a reflection on the nature of the scientific knowledge, is a domain of studies with particular relevance to critical thinking, which is fundamental both in the scientific practice and in the public reception of the scientific work. The present paper aims to demonstrate this relevance in four domains. First, by highlighting epistemological problems present at the level of the confirmation and refutation of empirical hypotheses. Second, by analyzing the concept of causality and some of the main critical questions that are associated with the exercise of causal reasoning. Third, and at level of the distinction between science and pseudoscience, by presenting typical characteristics of pseudoscience that can serve as a guide to judge the credibility of putative scientific studies. Lastly, by evaluating the extent to which science can be influenced by non-epistemic (social, moral or political) values and by proposing means to control the action of these values in science. One may conclude that the contribution of philosophy of science strengthens the educational benefits of training in critical thinking, both at the level of a scientific education and a general education.
This is the only logical response grammatically. You don't use "to have" with most of these words except "turbulence" perhaps, but you would not refer to it as "a massive turbulence"
