Philosophy of Science

Philosophy of Science

Robert Coloso, Carlo Dominic Dela Cruz, and Marisue Eusebio

Introduction

!   Philosophy of science�x history of science�x psychology or sociology of science�x cosmology or philosophy of nature �

!   What is philosophy of science?�- examine concepts �- questions concepts �

Philosophy of science is critique of science.

Philosophy of science before Kuhn

!   The period before Kuhn’s work, The structure of scientific revolutions, which was published in 1996.

!   Science was regarded as a rational pursuit, governed by strict standards to obtain objectivity.

!   Views of science during this period were influenced by the Logical Positivists.

Logical Positivists

!   They were disturbed by the “nonsense” of some statements and theories that were branded as true.

!   They were against the concept of the metaphysical and called the notion meaningless

!   They believed that, if a statement is not verifiable,it is meaningless. (i.e. Angels exist, the unconscious mind represses painful experiences)

Logical Positivists and Verifiability

!   For a claim to be scientific and meaningful, it must be verifiable and observable.

!   Physicists deal with unobservable phenomena (electrons, photons, etc.)

!   Some unobservable entities were meaningful if they can be connected to the language used to talk about them

!   The statement, “All meaningful sentences must be verifiable”, is itself unverifiable.

!   Karl Popper

Karl Popper

!   Disagreed with the notion that the unverifiable was meaningless.

!   Metaphysical statements may be meaningful, but not scientific.

!   He proposed that the distinguishing factor between science and nonscience was falsifiability.

!   If a statement can be proven to be false via experimentation, it is scientific.(i.e. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, Creationist Theory)

!   According to Popper, we can only try to falsify our hypotheses. The contrary would result in a fallacy called affirming the consequent.

! Imre Lakatos

Imre Lakatos

!   Criticized Popper’s notion of falsifiability.

!   An experiment might falsify a hypothesis. However, the experiment might be flawed or the theory needs to be modified.

!   For example, a penny falls from the top of a tall building and falls in a straight line, however, it is theorized that the earth moves very fast about its axis.

! Lakatos proposed that every theory has a hard core and that aspects of the theory may be modified without changing the true nature of the theory. This saves the theory if the experiment fails.

The Received View of Science

!   The way science was perceived prior to Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

!   Summarized by James Ladyman in Understanding the philosophy of science (2002)

Dr. James Ladyman. Department of Philosophy - University of Bristol, England

The Received View of Science

1. Cumulative. Science progresses as knowledge is passed on.

2. Unified. There is a single set of rules that unify scientific work

3. Circumstances of the theory do not affect the evidence of the theory

4. There are value-free confirmations and falsifications present when evaluating hypotheses

5. There is a sharp distinction between science and other belief systems

6. There is a sharp distinction between observational and theoretical terms

7. Scientific terms have fixed and precise meanings

Kuhn’s Critique of the Received View - The Paradigm Shift

!   A paradigm shift occurs when a model of rules, definitions, and beliefs, or a paradigm, is replaced by a newer version

!   Typically occurs when new theories cannot be explained by the existing paradigm

!   A paradigm can be metaphorized as a “lens” that we use to view the world in a way that it makes sense to us

Kuhn’s Critique of the Received View - The Paradigm Shift

•  Paradigm shifts can only described as replacements rather than improvements

- Old paradigms are discarded in favor of the newly established paradigm

■  The old model cannot be translated to the new model

- Theories between old and new paradigms are incommensurable

•  While we know more than we do today because of centuries of science, it is not completely accurate to say that science is cumulative because paradigm shifts occur. The development of science is discontinuous in that not all concepts are improved upon, rather they are abandoned and replaced.

Kuhn’s Critique of the Received View - The Paradigm Shift

•  Received view:�As a new paradigm is adapted, the overwritten paradigm ceases to be scientific, and is relegated as a myth

•  Kuhn’s Critique: �If old paradigms are regarded as myths, then myths can be developed and produced in the same way science is

•  Therefore, the distinction between science and other belief systems is blurred, and paradigm shifts are not made on purely rational bases.

Kuhn’s Critique of the Received View - TheValue-laden Nature of Science

Scientists develop values depending on a number of factors •  Field • Associated scientific community • Cultural influence • Personal experience Because of these values, the scientist’s performance in the field may change • The relevance and value of some theories may differ. • When working with theories, the grounds for falsification or confirmation may change as certain evidence may be overlooked or over-emphasized

Kuhn’s Critique of the Received View - Theories and Definitions

•  Theory defines what observations and facts are  considered relevant.

•  Without theory as a guide, observations cannot be properly conducted

•  As paradigms change, perceptions also change. As a result. some existing definitions of terms may change

•  Therefore, terms do not have static definitions

Kuhn’s SSR

!   two major advancements �- social constructivism �- feminist view �

Social Constructivism

!   “ a term referring to an increasingly popular philosophical position in which the objects of our knowledge are held to be either wholly or partly construed by our coming to know them in the way them do. ”

!   the world changes as a result of scientific revolutions

psychological�- less controversial�- less interesting

actual -more radical

!   the world holds a totality of facts and what counts as facts depend on what the theory one holds, and the world that is referred to by these theories changes as well.

Feminist Philosophies of Science

!   claims of science have been socially constructed by men

!   Sandra Harding�- pioneering feminist of science�- errors made in science have come about as a result of gender bias �-male neurosis �� !   MEN�- individualistic �- less concerned �

!   WOMEN�- intuitive�- less prone to abstractions ��

“men are too psychologically damaged to be the ones doing most science”

Feminist Philosophies of Science

!   Helen Longino�- based analysis of science on a feminist epistemology �- shows that errors in science made over centuries can be corrected by a feminist-inspired critique of sciences. ��

Reference:

! http://www.bristol.ac.uk/school-of-arts/people/james-a-ladyman/about.html