L4 - Experimentation and Popper Flashcards
What are some of the criticisms of the ‘received view of science’ from studies of the philosophy of science?
Can we experience the external world directly? - Philosophers argue no
Can general laws be produced on the basis of the process of reasoning that’s known as induction? - Philosophers argue against it
What are the four statements or assumptions of the ‘received view of science’?
1) Objects in the natural world are objective and real, and they enjoy an existence independent of human beings.
2) Scientific knowledge is determined by the actual character of the physical world.
3) Science comprises a unitary set of methods and procedures, concerning which there is, by and large, a consensus.
4) Science is an activity that is individualistic and mentalistic (cognitive).
What is the Naive Realism / Naive Inductivism criticism of Bacon’s traditional view?
Traditional View: Involves the assumption that the world is just the way empirical science represents it to be.
Criticism: Because we are humans we interpret and label things, our processes of thinking about things make us draw inferences and assumptions that are not necessarily independent from us.
The way we see, measure, theorise etc. influences the way we interpret the world.
What was John Locke’s (1632-1704) claim about human understanding or knowledge?
Human understanding or knowledge is based on the information that we get from experience, from our sense organs (seeing, smelling, tasting, touching, hearing).
That the human mind is like a tabula rasa (blank sheet, we are blank canvases when we are born)
Big impact on psychology
What type of philosophy of human nature is John Locke’s?
An empiricists philosophy of human nature.
What is the underlying presumption behind the claim that observation is what provides a secure basis for scientific knowledge?
That human observers have more or less direct access to the external world.
What are Philosophers of Science’s counter-argument to the claim of Scientists that ‘although we see the world differently (subjectively), we can rid ourselves of preconception through the scientific method to witness objective reality directly’?
No matter how much we try to disassociate ourselves from the world, we always will have biological functions that mediate our world and what we experience.
Therefore we cannot have direct, uninterpreted, veridical experience (coinciding with reality). We cannot directly observe the facts.
What is the theory-dependent criticism of the ‘received’ view of science?
Science is always based upon a theory which will be created by human imagination and therefore our imagination will influence how we see the world.
We look to see what our theories already predict.
What is the theory-dependent criticism of observation?
Observation can’t be separated out from a theoretical system of categorisation.
Things are perceived as certain things in different ways and different times because of our culture, experience etc.
What is the Philosophers of Science’s cultural criticism of science?
That our scientific versions of how things are viewed are influenced by the individuals doing the theorising and the general preconceptions and theories of the broader culture.
Therefore the neutral or objective claim made by science claims for itself can never be actually obtained.
Do Philosophers of Science Believe that scientists are passive observers of the way things are in the external world?
Why or why not.
No.
Scientists might be seen as active creators/constructors of theories about the nature of the world.
People are not unmotivated, dispassionate observers of the world. We are all subjective human beings.
Define Conjecture.
An opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information.
Who was Karl Popper and what did he publish in 1934?
Austrian Philosopher who attempted to define science in his work ‘The Logic of Scientific Discovery’
What was Popper’s main argument about how Science is conducted?
We don’t passively observe nature, instead, we form tentative theories (conjectures) and seek to prove if they are wrong.
How does Science work according to Popper?
Can science tell us the truth about the world?
We have conjectures that are controlled in a negative way by evidence (we constantly attempt to disprove them).
Science is the body of theories that have so far resisted falsification.
Therefore science can never be shown to be objectively true, it can only tell us what is not true.
