* * *
___________________________________________________________________________
Study Guide
Introduction chapter, pp. 11-14. Between Scepticism and Scientism
Study Questions
1. What is meant by scientism and, in scientism, what is meant by science.
Scientism is the belief that science is superior to any other attempt to secure knowledge, will
solve all our problems, and its laws provide true certainty. Scientism believes that science is
testing for facts through experimentation and through the scientific method.
2. What do the writers mean by the notion of the mind as a “crooked mirror”?
A crooked mirror means that our minds view distorted versions of reality, not completely
accurate or reliable. We view reality through personal bias.
3. What is meant by post-modernism? Which concept could be its opposite within the
framework of thinking about science?
Post-modernism was a philosophical movement initiated in the second half of the 20th
century and focused on individual and emotional expression. It believed that there is more
than one truth, denying that objective reality exists but that subjective reality does.
4. What is meant by scepticism? And what is meant by ‘anything goes’?
Scepticism states that there is a lot that is unknown due to our minds being crooked mirrors.
It believes that science is a faith and does not give us 100% true knowledge and thus urges
people to think critically. Thus, its “slogan” is anything goes, which essentially means that
since we do not know anything with complete certainty, everything is equally possible, so
anything goes.
5. Explain what the debate between scientism and scepticism entails? Give a current
example of this debate.
The debate between the two considers which is the ideal position to have when it comes to
science and its discoveries, how to view reality. A current example is that of religion, given
that science, rejects religion and presents what scientists consider to be facts, but those who
follow religions go beyond this and believe that there is a lot that cannot be proven but this
does not make it untrue.
6. Which questions are the most important in this book, according to the authors?
How can we acquire true knowledge? How do our personal biases affect how we interact with
science?
7. What do the writers of the book mean by the title: ‘Exploring humans’?
,Philosophy is the study of how humans think and how society functions, thus making the
book title appropriate as it aims to explore not only the philosophers and their interactions,
debates, etc. but also how the rest of us think and acquire knowledge.
8. This book consists of three parts; what are these, and what are they about? Summarize
each part in a sentence.
Part 1: Philosophy of knowledge - Discusses the developments theories about how people
acquire knowledge
Part 2: Philosophy of science - Discusses the debates and development of scientific
methods, and which method is ideal
Part 3: New perspectives / possible solutions - Discusses pragmatism and naturalism, as
well as what the future holds for science
Important concepts
Scientism
Scepticism
Post-modernism
Important individuals
Dolly and Snuppy
Paul Feyerabend
, * * *
__________________________________________________________________________
Study Guide
Reader text 1
Watt & Van den Berg (2002). The Nature and Utility of Scientific Theory
Study Questions
1. Which two methods of inquiry are distinguished by the authors? Describe them.
- Scientific inquiry: the controlled, systematic, and formalized process of
analytical-empirical research using the scientific method in order to acquire facts. Scientists
control for error and try to maintain as objective of a stance as possible, providing reliable
results.
- Naive inquiry: the non-controlled, non-systematic, and non-formalized method of
trying to acquire knowledge, but is high based on personal bias and beliefs (e.g. religion)
which means it is highly unreliable and naive scientists will not control for error or try to
maintain an objective stance – they will stop once their point / belief is supported.
2. What is, according to you, the most important difference between the two ways of
inquiry?
The most important difference is the way the two inquiries control (or don’t) for error. This
includes keeping an objective stance given that bias is a type of error. This is because
although it is relevant to know that they are associated with different things, it is the method
and the control that determines the reliability and consequently the believability of
experiments, so if the method is careless with little consideration of errors, the results are
unreliable.
3. Which four methods of knowing do the authors describe? Summarize them
- Method of tenacity: believing that something is true simply because it has always
been so. Not questioning the norm simply because it is the norm, not necessarily because it
makes sense.
- Method of authority: believing that something is true because an authority figure /
someone with high regard has stated that this is true. Once again not questioning it, but this
time because the person that has stated that the thing is true has high levels of respect and
power, so people see their information as more reliable.
- Method of reasonable men / a priori: believing that something is true because that
is what the majority believes, also believing things that agree with reason but not necessarily
observations.
- Method of science: believing that something is true because it has been established
by multiple mutually agreed-upon rules that establish the truth.
, 4. What are the basic requirements of the scientific method according to these authors?
Describe them.
There are 9 main requirements for the scientific method:
1. The use and selection of concepts, meaning things are explained by seeking causal
relationships.
2. Linking concepts by propositions, meaning stating why causal relationships exist
under the circumstances of a specific experiment.
3. Testing theories with observable evidence.
4. Definition of concepts in order to bridge the gap between theory and observation.
5. The publication of definitions and procedures in order to make the knowledge gained
more easily accessible for future scientists.
6. Controlling for alternative explanations in order to establish higher reliability of this
data.
7. Unbiased selection of evidence → more reliability
8. Making theory and observation compatible (supporting the theory with observation)
9. Providing limitations present in the study conducted (impossible to have a perfect
experiment)
