Lecture 2: standard image, Popper and values Flashcards
meaning empirical analytical results
- scientific research based on systematic observation (observation)
- decomposable into logical, elementary statements (proposition)
- hypothesis about empirical regularities (expressed as a ‘law’)
basic inductive inference
proposition –> observation –> hypotheses about regularity (law)
example: this bird is a raven –> this bird is black: all ravens are black
deductive-nomological inference
hypothesis about regularity (law) –> observation –> prediction/explanation
example: all ravens are black, ravi is a raven: ravi is black
basic principles of the empirical-analytical method
- free of bias or values
- takes a third-person perspective
- focused on obtaining objective knowledge
- often makes use of statistical analysis
important features of logical positivism’s conception of science
- classical rationality (argument are only valid if they do logical reasoning or have empirical proof)
- criterion of meaning
- verification and confirmation
- theory-free observation
analytic statement vs synthetic statement
analytic: wat je in het woordenboek ziet (=unemployed are people without work)
synthetic: concrete zin (= op 1 december 2015 was er 6,4% werkeloosheid)
criterion of verification & criterion of confirmation meaning
criterion of verification: a theory is scientific if it can be ‘shown to be true’ on the basis of facts obtained by theory-free observation
- ideal: science with true statement (empirical regularities and laws)
criterion of confirmation: a theory is scientific if it can be ‘confirmed’ on the basis of facts obtained by theory-free observation
- ideal: science ascertains truth, via inductive logical, to practical certainty
Karl Popper’s philosophy of science
Popper is skeptist about induction/logical positivism
(observation –> hypothesis): what if the 1001th raven is white instead of black?
- hypothesis can never be truly confirmed: the best we can do is provide refutation of theories
so: testing can only lead to falsification
3 features of the ideal of value-free science
- autonomous: only scientists determine which research questions are worthwhile
- impartial: moral judgements or idealogical views play no role in the acceptance of scientific knowledge
- neutral: researchers tell how the world works, not how it should work. science describes reality and doesn’t prescribe what we should do
epistemic vs. non-epistemic values
epistemic values: refer to considerations in the evaluation of hypotheses and theories (about precision and scope of theories, models etc.)
non-epistemic values: refer to moral judgements, ideological views or lreligious beliefs part of the grounds that determine the assumption or rejection of scientific claims.
objective science: when epistemic is during research with constitutive role and non-epistemic before/after research with a contextual role
constitutive values vs. contextual values
constitutive values: are necessary in conducting scientific research. Give shape to research “from within” in a fundamental way
contextual values: form part of the situation in which the researcher takes place. Design the research in a ‘random’ way and are therefore not necessary for the practice of scientific research. (before/after research: money)
characteristics of scientific community need to posses when objectivity can be preserved
- recognized avenues for criticism (there are recognized forums for critical debate)
- shared standards
- community response (criticism is addressed, positions and assumptions are adjusted if necessary in the light of criticism)
- equality of intellectual authority