POS L3 The ideal of positive science (2) Flashcards
The standard view
- theories that cannot be reduced to observations with logic are allowed
- induction is allowed (individual statements are true and empirical laws are likely to be true)
how are empirical laws made?
- set amount of observations
- try to come to a general statement
- set an empirical law
–> this law is likely to be true but you can’t say it with certainty
The model of empirical cycles aka the hypothetical-deductive method
Observations–>(generalization)–>Empirical Laws–> Theory–> New Hypothesis–>(testing hypothesis)–> Observations–> Empirical Laws
Induction
Observations-> Empirical laws-> Theory
Deduction
Theory–> New Hypothesis–> Observations
theoretical language
- we cannot reduce theoretical language to observations
observational language
- you can describe everything that you can observe
empirical laws, new hypothesis
Truth and truth likeliness
- observations are always true
- empirical laws and testing hypothesis is likely to be true
Critical Rationalism
- founder is Karl Popper
- criticized the standard view and logical positivism
- said that the problems of logical positivism were too fundamental to make adequate adjustments.
How should the truth be found according to Popper?
- not through verification (standard view of science)
- knowledge should be accumulated by trial and error
Why is the revised model not correct according to Popper?
- theory dependent search light theory
- the problem of induction
Search light theory
- an observation is always dependent on a theory
- we cannot observe everything at the same time and therefore look at things subjectively, relying on things we already know.
Problem of induction after Popper
- even worse then search light hypothesis
- he says that the induction approach we use in the adjusted L.P. is wrong. We look at the likelihood that a general statement is true, however, the likelihood should always be zero.
- the basic theory is already wrong, because you do not consider all possible situations
Three problems that contribute to the problem of induction according to Popper
- degree of confirmation will be be close to zero
- trying to achieve the highest degree of likelihood will make theories useless in practice
(likelihood to be true and empirical evidence have a negative correlation) - induction is a fundamental problem: the amount of observations is endless –> no 100% certainty
degree of confirmation (probability) will be be close to zero
- the degree of confirmation assesses to what extent a theory is supported by empirical evidence
Degree of confirmation = # observations of X / all possible cases of X
- according to Popper possible cases are endless leading to equation to equal zero
Poppers view within critical rationalism
- rationalism: we should be as precise about reality as possible –> high likelihood that these theories are false
- but when true they tell us a lot about reality
- critical aspect: the likelihood of a theory being true gets higher the more often it is tried to be invalidated
What does Popper believe in?
He believes in falsification instead of verification
Problems with logical positivism
- theoretical concept
- induction problem
theoretical concept
logical positivism says that we have to be able to reduce every theory back to observations through logic. However, that is often not possible. According to logical positivism we should therefore dismiss the theory. But that is not possible in reality. (We cannot just say that for example a theory in physics is untrue)
- theoretical concepts like democracy are normatively infected. (It is about how we think the world should be; this does not go back to observations)
Examples of certain concepts in very successful field of science that cannot be reduced to observations alone
- force in physics
- consciousness in psychology
- democracy in political science
- firm performance in strategic management
–> difficult for us to find an observation they are based on
Two types of meaning of concepts
Intension
Extension
Intension
(theoretical meaning): the conjunction of general properties that together define a concept
(imagine the overlap of three circles with the properties small, glass, round –> marble)
Extension
(empirical meaning): the set of all (real-life) phenomena that the concept refers to
(has to exist in reality)
A well defined concept of X
- based on solid theoretical arguments that explain the intension of X
- denotes all cases of X in reality
What structure do concepts in social science have?
complex structure which are multi-dimensional
reflective concepts
causality goes from the center to the outside properties
(Firm performance; and profit, growth etc.)
Disease symptom model
formative concepts
properties make up the concept
Rule of law, Free elections… –> Democracy
The pragmatic concession towards logical positivism (revision of logical positivism)
- we allow theoretical concepts which are normatively infected
(we need them to create scientific knowledge and bring it further)
Two conditions to allow theoretical concepts in a system of knowledge
- These concepts explain something in the facts that is not apparent from observations alone (not just X–>Y but also why X–>Y)
- The use of these concepts leads to the development of new knowledge (i.e. new hypotheses) to be tested
What does the acceptability of a theoretical concept depend on ?
Its explanatory powers
Are concepts theories themselves?
Yes. We need to explain their structure in terms of the causally relevant explanatory properties
Adjustment of the L.P. model
- Allow theoretical concepts in the system of knowledge
(distinction btw. theoretical and observational language should be made in the system of knowledge) - Allow induction in the system of knowledge
(we have to say what the likelihood is that the statement is true)
theoretical language
- not everything can be reduced back to observations
observational language
- everything can be reduced back to observations
How to we develop/ accumulate knowledge?
By going around the model of the empirical cycle. This is basically a combination of induction and deduction using the adjustment of the L.P. model with theoretical concepts and induction.
Does Poppers model extend beyond theory of science?
Yes also into Politics
Which statement has the highest likelihood to be true?
With the least amount of empirical content. Not the most general
What does science strive for
For statements with the highest amount of empirical content.
