Chapter 1: Introduction Flashcards
historiography
the study of the proper way to record history.
there are often no final answers to the questions this topic raises
what is the problem with viewing psychology as a science that started in the late 19th century in Germany?
1) it ignores the vast philosophical heritage that molded psychology into the tump of science that it eventually became
2) it omits important aspects of psychology that arose outside the realm of science
historicism vs presentism
historicism is the study of the past for its own sake
presentism is interpreting and evaluating historical events in terms of contemporary knowledge and standards
zeitgeist approach
the defining spirit or mood of a particular period of history as shown by the ideas and beliefs of the time
the great-person approach to historiography
empathizes the works of individuals such as Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Darwin, or Freud.
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1841-1981) embraced the great-person approach to history, saying that history “resolves itself very easily into the biography of a few stout and earnest persons.”
historical development approach
showing how various individuals or events contributed to changes in an idea or connect through the years
for example, one could focus on how the idea of mental illness has changed throughout history
E. G. Boring (1866-1968)
president of the APA, stressed the importance of zeitgeist. clearly, ideas do not occur in a vacuum. a new idea, to be accepted or even considered, must be compatible with existing ideas
in other words, a new idea will only be tolerated if it arises within an environment that can assimilate it. an idea or viewpoint that arises before people are prepared for it will not be understood well enough to be critically evaluated
what is as important as validity in judging ideas?
psychological and sociological factors are at least as important. new ideas are always judged within the context of existing ideas
if new ideas are close enough to existing ideas, they will at least be understood; whether they are accepted, rejected, or ignored is another matter
what did E. G. Boring say about why it is important to know the history of psychology?
the experimental psychologist … needs historical sophistication within his own sphere of expertness. without such knowledge he sees the present in distorted perspective, he mistakes old facts and old views for new, and he remains unable to evaluate the significance of new movements and methods. in this matter I can hardly state my faith too strongly.
fashions of ideas in psychology
as Zeitgeists change, so does what appears fashionable in science, and psychology is not immune to this process
by studying history, we may discover ideas that were developed at an earlier time but, for whatever reason, remained dormant. the history of science offers several examples of an idea taking hold only after being rediscovered long after it had originally been proposed.
what did Paul Feyerabend say about history of theories?
the history of science is full of theories which were pronounced dead, then resurrected, then pronounced dead again only to celebrate another triumphant comeback. it makes sense to preserve faulty points of view for possible future use. the history of ideas, methods, and prejudices is an important part of the ongoing practice of science and this practice can change direction in surprising ways
how did science come into existence?
science came into existence as a way of answering questions about nature by examining nature directly rather than by depending on church dogma, past authorities, folk theories, or logical analysis alone. from science’s inception, its ultimate authority has been empirical observation (direct observation of nature), but there is more to steichen than simply observing nature
to be useful, observations must be organized or categorized in some way, and the ways in which they are similar to or different from other observations must be noted.
what is science? what are two major components of science?
science is the systematic attempt to rationally categorize or explain empirical observation. Popper described it as a way to rigorously test solutions to problems, while Kuhn emphasized the importance of paradigms that guide the research activities of science.
empirical observation
theory
rationalism
believes that the validity or invalidity of certain propositions can often best be determined by carefully applying the rules of logic
empiricism
maintains that the source of knowledge is always based on sensory observation
what are the two main functions of scientific theory?
it organizes empirical observations
it acts as a guide for future observations
confirmable propositions
a theory suggests propositions that are tested experimentally. if the propositions generated by a theory are confirmed by experimentation, the theory gains strength; if the propositions are not confirmed by experimentation, the theory loses strength
thus, scientific theories must be testable. that is, they must generate hypotheses that can be validated or invalidated empirically
scientific law
a constantly observed relationship between two or more classes of empirical events. for example, when x occurs, y also tends to occur. by stressing the lawfulness, science is proclaiming an interest in the general case rather than the particular case.
correlational laws
describe how classes of events vary together in some systematic way
for example, exercise tends to correlate positively with health. with such information, only prediction is possible. that is, if we know a person’s level of exercise, we could predict his or her health, and vice versa
causal laws
specify how events are causally related
for example, if we knew the causes of a disease, we could predict and control that disease - as preventing the casques of a disease from occurring prevents the disease from occurring
determinism
the assumption that what is being studied can be understood in terms of causal laws
the determinist assumes that everything that occurs is a function of a finite number of causes that, if these causes were known, an event could be predicted with complete accuracy
however, knowing all causes of an event is not necessary; the determinist simply assumes that they exist and that as more causes are known, predictions become more accurate
traditional view of science
involved empirical observation, theory formulation, theory testing, theory revision, prediction, control, the search for lawful relationships, and the assumption of determinism.
the principle of falsifiability
theory must be refutable
what, according to Popper, drives scientific progress?
a theory’s incorrect predictions, not its correct ones
in real scientific life theories typically contribute not by being right but by being wrong. in other words, scientific advance in theory as well as experiments tends to be built upon the successive corrections of many errors, both small and large. thus the popular notion that theory must be right to be useful is incorrect
Brett (1912-1965) made what point about Popperian science?
we tend to think of science as a “body of knowledge” which began to be accumulated when men hit upon “scientific methods.” this is a superstition. it is more in keeping with the history of thought to describe science as the myths about the role which have not yet been found to be wrong
correspondence theory of truth
the assumption that the world consists of knowable truths, and that following scientific procedure allowed scientists to systematically approximate these truths
