Samenvatting
Philosophy of Science & Methodology: Readings and Lectures Summary - PART 1!
- Instelling
- Universiteit Van Amsterdam (UvA)
- Boek
- Exploring Humans
Readings and Lectures Summary 2nd Semester (2018/19)
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 3 van de 17 pagina's
Voorbeeld 3 van de 17 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Gekoppeld boek
Titel boek:
Auteur(s):
- Uitgave:
- ISBN:
- Druk:
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Philosophy of Science and Methodology - PARTIAL EXAM 1 - April 25, 2019Lecture 1 // 1-4-19
Two philosophical positions about science
Scientism
Science is vastly superior to all other attempts at securing knowledge: its laws provide certainty.
- Age of certainty
- Other key words: facts, science is the truth, rationality
- Also associated with modernism (modern thinking): rational-secular, think for yourself, use
reason only, modernity
- Knowledge and truth about nature and humans are only found by and in science
- ‘Slogan’: scientific method is the only method to obtain facts/truth; science is about everything
- Our mind is the perfect mirror of reality/nature
- Science is objective
Skepticism
Science does not give certainty, it is equal to other forms of knowledge, science is a faith.
- Critical thinking about science, its methods/boundaries, pluralistic conception of rationality and
knowledge
- Other key words: more than one truth, truth is experience, uncertainty, knowledge = oppressive
power, science is an ideology
- Also associated with post modernism (culture (thinking) after modernism): also secular but
different; individual and emotional expression are key construction
- Relativism (no absolute truths, differences in moral judgements amongst people and cultures)/
Nihilism (denial or lack of belief in meaningful aspects of life; life is without objective meaning/
purpose/intrinsic value)
- Knowledge and truth are social constructions that need deconstruction
- ‘Slogan’: anything goes; carnival of approaches should be allowed
- Our mind is a crooked mirror, we know nothing and we never will
- Science is developed by humans and is an interpretation of nature and society
- Science is subjective and in the interest of the powerful
Scientism vs Skepticism
- Philosophical skepticism is critical thinking about science within the boundaries of philosophy
- A relativistic (= everything is relative), radical interpretation of philosophical skepticism has
become like a raging fire in society
- Background of issue/social debate around: alternative facts, fact-free politics, fake news, post-
truth era, political correctness, freedom of speech, identity politics and conformism
- In communication science terms: misinformation or disinformation
,Watt & van den Berg (2002) - The Nature and Utility of Scientific Theory
Two basic explanation styles
Naive inquiry
Non-formalized, non-systematic, non-controlled form of collecting and summarizing information
into naive theories.
- Naive science: when people with lack of awareness of the rules of science engage in inquisition
about how things work, finding explanations and predicting outcomes
- Theory (as defined for the purposes of this text): simplified explanation of reality
- Human, as naive scientists, try to explain and predict ordinary events in their world for utilitarian
purposes and because we are uncomfortable with unexplained phenomena
- More evidence improves the probability that a theory is true, each additional confirming
observation makes it more probable that the hypothesized relationship between variables is not
a coincidence
- Also known as: common sense (what we do in daily life), premodern thinking (religion, belief),
non-sophisticated ways of knowing reality (fixing belief)
- Methods of knowing: tenacity (common knowledge, naive way of reasoning), authority (high
regarded person speaks truth, works in religion too, naive too), reasonable man (reason and
logical consistency is key), science (established set of mutually agreed upon rules)
- Associated with biases, convictions, skepticism, myths, stereotypes
- Often people say ‘I have a theory’ when a hypothesis is meant (‘slogan’ of naive inquiry)
Scientific inquiry
Highly formalized, systematic, and controlled inquiry; observations and reasoning are error prone
Science shifts the locus of truth from single individuals to groups, by establishing a set of mutually
agreed upon rules for establishing truth.
- Also known as: the scientific method, modern thinking, analytical-empirical approach
- Associated with critical shift in perspective compared to naive inquiry, internal beliefs should be
supported by external evidence, methodological modeling
- ‘Slogan’: truth is an objective reality out there and our ideas do not alter that reality; we develop
theories that are true
- Key is theory! A theory is a set of constructs, definitions, and propositions that present a
systematic view of phenomena by specifying relations among variables, with the purpose of
explaining and predicting phenomena.
- Scientific inquiry: laboratories and experiments are THE symbols of scientific inquiry in natural
and social sciences
- Basic requirements of the scientific method: use and selection of concepts, linking concepts by
propositions, testing theories with observable evidence, defining concepts, publication of
definitions and procedures, control of alternative explanations, unbiased selection of evidence,
reconciliation of theory and observation, awareness of the limitations of the scientific method
, Naive inquiry vs Scientific inquiry/method
- Main point of difference: the awareness that our observations and reasoning are error-prone
and that we must employ strategies that help us guard against committing error
- Five points in which the two methods differ (Kerlinger, 1986)
- (1) The development of theories
- Theory: set of two or more concepts interrelated by one or mire hypothetical or theoretical
explanations (also simplified explanation of reality)
- Scientists: selection and elimination of possible concepts by systematically reviewing prior
research, potentially adding new concepts based in logic, insight, and observation
- Naive scientists: will not go through selection process but will choose concepts that seem
appealing and he would like to be the cause, will use personal observation like a scientist
- Difference: naive scientist will consider his personal observations to be sufficient to
construct a story, while a true scientist will consider his personal observations as a
preliminary step in the process of scientific observation
- (2) The testing of theories
- Difference between them based on demand for evidence supporting the theory
- Scientists: will seek objective evidence (evidence that can be collected by anyone) then
make conclusions; are aware of human tendency towards selective use of evidence, will
be conscious about bias
- Naive scientists: will deem a theory true because it’s ‘common sense’; if more evidence
resurfaces: consistent information will reinforce the conclusions, conflicting information will
be ignored
- (3) Control of alternative explanations
- Closely related to development of theories
- Scientists: will design study that will conclude that one particular variable causes a
particular effect (or not) after finding number of possible competing causes for a
phenomena
- Naive scientists: cannot control systematically mostly because they probably didn’t
identify all relevant concepts
- (4) The nature of relationships
- Three types of relationships between variables: null, covariance, causal
- Scientists: will apply scientific methodology to distinguish between null and non-null
relationships
- Naive scientists: will likely capitalize on the joint occurrence of two phenomena and
assume them to be linked together, particularly if this fits their preconceptions or beliefs
- (5) Testing theories with observable evidence
- Scientists: search for relevant concepts needs to be limited to concepts that are
observable by anyone
- Naive scientists: don’t concern themselves with such rule of evidence, will assume that
because something is obvious/common sense to them it will apply to anyone
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper alicetiker. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €3,99. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 49051 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen