4 Knowledge and knoweldge gaps Flashcards
3 main approaches to understand and produce knowledge
.ontology: what exist? What is thé nature of thé social World?
. epistemology : what sort of knowledge of it is possible ? How Can WE know about it?
. Methodology : what stratégies Can WE use to gain that knowledge ?
Influence of values in research
Values: researcher’s opinions, assumptions, biases
They influence:
.topic selection and id of research qu: personal or sociétal priorités often guide what researchers choose to study
.data gathering: décisions abt what data to collect and how to interpret them
.observations, experiments, interprétation of results: ex the Rosenthal effect= demonstrates how a researcher’s expectations Can unconsciously influence thé behaviour of research subjects
.drawing ccl: res. May unconsciously favor interprétations aligning with their values
What are thé implications for social sciences on the existence of values
.social sciences are reflective of human soc, where values and facts are deeply intertwined
. Res. Must critically examine their own biases and assumptions, when possible making them explicit
. Ensuring that values do not influence thé validity of thé research
How values, biases are created?
.’going native’: id too closely with thé subject of ur research creates biaises
.thé ‘Heisenberg effect’: HB changes when those being studied alter their behaviour bcs they know that they are studied
.thé Heisenberg uncertainty principle shows how thé act of measurement affects thé sys being measured (challenge Newton’s physics view that all phenomena Can bé measured with sufficuent précision if WE have thé right tools)
What is induction in reasoning explain with thé ex of Mésopotamia fromstudents from: Iraq scored 91% on thé ASIR 2021TO:mesopot has a culture of high académic achievement
Reasoning from thé particular to général, from thé fact to thé causes= inferring général Principles based on specific Obs
1. Observation (students from Iraq scored 91% on thé ASIR 2021)
2. Pattern: student from mesopot tend to score above 85%
3. Hypothesis : all mesopot students perform well accademically
4. Theory: mesopot has a culture of high académic achievement
How Can an inductive reasoning Can bé flawed Ex with Mesopotamia (“all students from mesopot score above 85% on thé ASIR exam”)
Bcs based on insufficient inductive reasoning
. Limited observations : only 2 countries are included (Iraq and syria), only for 2 years so not large number of Obs
.lack of variety: Obs not abt contexts liké diff years, students from other parts of mesopot, différent educational sys…
.potential conflicts: généralisation assumes all students will consistently perform this way, without évidence supporting such uniformity across Time and conditions
Critics of induction according to Hume
.circular reasoning: induction relies on thé assumption that past patterns, past observations predict future outcomes
.uncertainty of future prédictions: just bcs smtg has consistently occured doesn’t mean it Always will
Ex Russell’s “inductivist turkey”: a turkey expect good everyday bcs it is fed everyday, only to bé slaughtered unexpectedly
.empirical limits: induction assumes that sensory Obs reflects reality but language may not fully reflect reality, Obs and instruments could be biaised or incomplete, exp itself may not provide direct Access to thruth
Général critics of induction
.thruth claims: induction cannot establish Universal truths bcs relies on probabilistic reasoning not certainty
.language and reality: what WE describe may not fully align with what WE observed
.Obs biaises
Relevance of knowing induction bias for IR
.res. often generalise patterns in global politics, eco or culture based on specific cases so understanding limitations help stopping overgeneralisations
.reorganising the assumptions behind inductive reasoning aids in critically evaluating research and théories
What is thé falsification principle and of who
Karl Popper
Any research that wishes to bé considéred SC must subject it’s hypothèses to falsification, to test it, to try it and to prove it wrong
Mechanism to falsify a theory
.a permitted statement in a theory is smtg that thé theory prédicts ex all Swan are white
. prohibited statement: those that thé theory says cannot happen ex some swans are pink
.if a prohibited statement is Obs to bé true (ex a pink Swan is discovered) then if falsifiés thé theory
Popper critics of induction
induction cannot guarantee thé truth of Universal statements:
.Obs are Always singular (specific Time, place…) so not Universal
.no number of Obs Can verify Universal statements (one wrong élément among thousands and thousands is enough to prove thé theory wrong, and WE Can not test everything)
.thé validity of induction relies on itself : circular argument cf Hume
Popper’s solution of falsifiability over verifiability
falsification= disproving hypothèses rather than confirming them:
.formulate a hypothesis with testable prédictions ex all swans are white
.test thé predictions through Obs and experiments
.if évidence contradicts with prédictions ex WE find a pink Swan, thé hypo is refuted
.if no contradiction is found, thé hypo is corroborated but not vérified as universally true
What is thé scientific objectivity according to Popper
SC should bé objective and grounded in critical testing:
.objectivity does not arise from thé SCientist but from thé social process of mutual criticism, collaboration and compétition among scientists
.Obs are theory-laden: what WE Obs is influenced by thé théories WE hold, so complète neutrality is difficult
.critics of naturalism (belief that social sciences should imitateur natural sc): soc SC face unique challenges, including thé influence of researcher’s values+ true objectivity in any SC dépends in openness to criticism and willingness to révise or reject theories
What are thé challenges to falsification?
.theory-laden Obs: Obs are shaped by existing théories, so thé process of testing us not free of bias
.thomas Kuhn’s critics: SCience often operates with paradigms which resist falsification+ paradigm shifts occur when anomalies accumulate, leading to revolutionary changes rather than incremental refutations
.SCientific conservatism: in practices significant théories are not instantly discarded when contradicted, sc work to résolve anomalies rather than reject thé theory outright, and better to keep esp when the falsifications are minority or explainable by revising auxiliary assumptions
. Sc hypotheses cannot be tested in isolation, the depend on background assumptions (hard to apply to social sciences bcs focus on HB, context…)
.Weinberg’s observation: excessive modifications to a theory to align with data might make it less credible
. Apparent falsifications may arise from flaws in the experimental setup or incomplete data, errors in the auxiliary assumptions, rather than the core theory itself
Implications of falsification for social science
.popper’s deductive approach: social scientists should form hypothèses déductively and attempt them through critical testing
.limitations: social sciences deal with complex HB, values, context so falsification harder
.value of falsifiability: even in thé face of challenges, thé falsification principle offers a rigorous way to distinguish sc inquiery from pseudo-sc
What is thé invisible dragon theory and by who
Carl Sagan
Same as Popper: if there is no way to test or disprove a hypo ex an invisible dragon exist, it cannot bé sc
what is Halperin and Oliver chapter about (week 4) disscus whether social research can be truly objective and value-free
according to Halperin and Oliver, how objective knowledge and values intersect in social-scientific inquiry?
two types of positivist questions:
1. Normative: Addresses what ought or should be the case.
2. Empirical: Focuses on observable reality and relies on empirical data derived from
observations.
chapter: disscus whether social research can be truly objective and value-free:
-Positivism maintains that facts and values are separable, allowing for objective inquiry.
Critics argue that values inevitably shape research through the selection of topics, interpretation of data, and theoretical frameworks.
-Max Weber emphasized striving for value-neutrality while acknowledging that researchers’ values influence their work.
Kuhn’s paradigm theory critiques the idea of objective progress in science, suggesting that paradigms are shaped by subjective and social factors.
-compare Lakatos and Kuhn’s view on scientific process.
what is Kuhn’s paradigm shift?
➡ Paradigm: A framework of theories and assumptions guiding research within a field during a specific period.
➡ Kuhn’s Model:
● Paradigms dominate until anomalies force a paradigm shift.
● Shifts are revolutionary, bringing new ways of thinking and transforming scientific
understanding.
Example:
● Post-WWII modernization theory aimed to prevent USSR influence on developing
nations.
● The theory was challenged by anomalies like persistent economic inequality despite
industrialization, leading to dependency theory as a competing paradigm
what is Lakatos’s response to Kuhn’s paradigm shift
Introduced the concept of a scientific research program with two components:
○ Protective Belt: Auxiliary assumptions that can be adjusted.
○ Hard Core: Fundamental and unchanging elements of a theory.
➡ Heuristics:
● Negative Heuristic: Prohibits questioning the hard core.
● Positive Heuristic: Guides adjustments in the protective belt.
-> Emphasized progressive problem shifts as markers of scientific change
Example:
Lakatos argued modernization and dependency theories co-evolved, representing
adjustments within a research program rather than a paradigm shift.
which 2 contested theories form the foundation of social science inquiry
Empirical and normative theories
what are Weber and Nagel’s pov on values (normative part of the theories, that is always there even if not clearly stated)
➡ Weber’s View:
● Differentiates between factual and value-based questions but acknowledges values
influence scientific practice.
● Recommended maintaining ethical neutrality while focusing on facts.
● Recognized that unconscious biases persist but can be corrected.
➡ Nagel’s Addition:
● Scholars should transparently state their value assumptions to allow scrutiny.
● Bias recognition and correction are achievable through established methods.
what is The Heisenberg Effect
occurs when observation alters the phenomenon under study (bias in research)
Example: In social science, theories can create self-fulfilling prophecies, influencing the behaviors they aim to explain(the belive makes the reality).
