Samenvatting
Summary 2.3 Problem 4
- Instelling
- Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam (EUR)
Summary for problem 4 for Block 2.3
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 2 van de 5 pagina's
Voorbeeld 2 van de 5 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Gekoppeld boek
Titel boek:
Auteur(s):
- Uitgave:
- ISBN:
- Druk:
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Problem 5 - Bem & Jong + Hughes B. M. What is Pseudoscience + Turner et al. Scientific Norms/Counternorms
Characteristics of scientific knowledge
- Historically, science was organized common sense
- The new scientific methods have a systematic nature that tries to formulate laws that apply
everywhere
1. Systematicity: theories must be applicable, coherent and if possible hierarchical, the
domain of application is specified at the outset
2. Well-defined methods: methods should also specify what counts as legitimate subject
matter
3. Reduction: ignoring certain aspects of reality at the descriptive level and reducing
phenomena to underlying principles at an explanatory level
4. Objectivity: being controllable, reliable and intersubjectively observable
5. Clarity: statements are phrased unambiguously, addressed to the public domain
6. Revisable: scientific knowledge is open, never definite and at all times revisable
- Testability of science goes beyond common-sense
- Common sense is dependent on unchanging conditions whereas science is explicit about its
assumptions
- Science is systematic and coherent in a way that everyday knowledge is not
- Science avoids inconsistencies but common sense is not concerned about that and tries to
build homogeneous network of concepts
- Manifest image: world of objects of common sense, is an illusion e.g. water
- Scientific image: world of particles and forces e.g. H2O
Deductive arguments:
- doesn’t generate new knowledge
- Arguments are sets of statements connected in such a way that conclusions follow them
- When the conclusion can be deduced from the premises, these inferences are called
deductive
o E.g. men are bigger than mice, mice are bigger than ants, thus: men are bigger than
ants
- Among conclusive arguments are syllogisms: argument is false or doubtful because of the
first premises
o E.g. all politicians are liars, all members of the parliament are politicians, thus all
members of parliament are liars
- The conclusion of a deductive inference is true on 2 conditions:
o The argument must be valid or sound
o The premises must be true
Inductive arguments:
- generates new knowledge
- Among the non-conclusive arguments are inductive arguments
- They are generalizations from statements of lesser scope: what is true of a number of
members of a class is likely to be true of all members
o E.g. I know 5 psychologists and they are arrogant thus I think all psychologists are
arrogant
, - Inductive support for conclusion comes in degrees: it depends on the amount of evidence
in relation to the extent of the conclusion
- Science is empirical and inductive but it does not provide desired certainty, one can’t
anticipate future cases so there’s always room for skepticism the problem of induction
- Another problem with induction: one has to start with concepts and criteria to gather
observations (criteria for similarity) you should be able to tell whether a flamingo is a
pink swan or a separate species
The empirical cycle
- Stages: observation, induction, deduction, testing and evaluation
1. Observation:
o Empirical material is collected and ordered
o It’s systematic perception
o Tentative or implicit hypothesis formation also occurs in this stage
2. Induction:
o Phrasing of an explicit theory
o Explicit means the hypothesis yields specific verifiable predictions that can be
empirically tested
3. Deduction:
o Derivation of predictions/hypotheses from the theory
o One way is: operationalization: a concept is defined in terms of measurement
operations
o The goal is to formulate predictions, in an explicit, precise and unambiguous way
o Predictions must contain references to new situations, which are not already observed
4. Testing:
o Confrontation of the predictions with empirical data (actual data collection)
5. Evaluation:
o Results of the test are used as feedback for the more general theory from which the
hypotheses are derived
o Unexpected results may lead to new discoveries
PDF – Hughes Brian
- Astronomy is scientific because it uses empiricism to resolve uncertainties regarding the
contents of the universe
- Astrology is unscientific because it rejects empiricism, and freely relies on assertions that
are superstitious and traditional
- Astrology also adopts claims that turn out to be false when tested scientifically
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 ebru1365. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €4,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 64438 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen