problem 6 - philosophy of science Flashcards
popper’s views: knowledge is not justified
we can never justify propositions or theories
- theories can never be subjected to all possible tests = there can always be a test that can falsify the theory
- can criticize theories and determine its value - if a theory “survived” this attempted falsification, the theory is confirmed (but it can never be stated with certainty that it is true)
popper’s views: knowledge is not true
knowledge is not something that is certainly true or even probably true
- at best we can say it has verisimilitude (truth-likeness) bcuz it survived our attempts to refute it
- allows us to say that these beliefs “look like the truth”, but are not truth in any absolute, final sense
popper’s views: knowledge is not belief
knowledge is not a matter of subjective belief but rather is objective in 2 ways:
1. knowledge claims when evaluated, become objects - the object of criticism
2. problems, theories & arguments exist independently of whether anyone believes these, asserts these or acts on these
popper & pseudoscience
the problem with pseudoscientific theories was that there are many confirmations for these theories in the world (due to confirmation bias, etc)
some pseudoscientific ideas are constructed in a way that they can explain any possible outcome
that is why it is so important to try to falsify theories by testing because this alone says something about the value/validity of the theory
what is falsification according to popper?
a scientific theory or hypothesis is considered meaningful and scientific only if it can be potentially proven false or falsified through empirical observation or experimentation
what is verification?
the process of confirming or proving the truth of a statement or hypothesis through empirical evidence or observation
seeks to provide supporting evidence for a hypothesis rather than attempting to disprove it
predictive theories & falsifiability
are very falsifiable, as all outcome scores except the expected score (e.g. IQ = 100) lead to a falsifiable result
can be said that the more specific the theory, the easier it is to falsify + the more universal the theory, the more falsifiable it is
what is provisional acceptance? (popper)
if a theory cannot be proven correct, provisional acceptance is the highest status the theory/claim can achieve
hypotheses are provisionally accepted when they align with current evidence, but their validity is continually subject to testing and potential falsification as scientific inquiry progresses
what is severe testing?
find a context where the hypothesis/situation is most likely to not be true
- if it is true under those conditions, we accept the hypothesis
e.g. if the hypothesis is that all babies cry all the time, observe a baby while breastfeeding, if they are still crying, the hypothesis is accepted
Kuhn’s 3 periods of science: the pre-paradigm or immature period
characterized by frequent & deep debates over legitimate methods, problems, and standards of solution
- these serve to define schools rather than to produce agreement
a field in a pre-paradigm period fails to demonstrate progress, especially progress in puzzle solving
there is no universal truth and everyone has different perspectives
Kuhn’s 3 periods of science: paradigmatic or mature science
emerges when there is agreement concerning what are to be the legitimate methods, problems & standards of solution
- this transition usually occurs in the aftermath of some notable scientific achievement
the field demonstrates cumulative progress + scientists do not seek novel facts or theories
dogmatic attitude (one ruling theory)
failures to solve puzzles are attributed to problems with the puzzle solving ability of scientists rather than to problems w the adequacy of the paradigm
Kuhn’s 3 periods of science: revolutionary or extraordinary science
characterized by letting go of the rules within normal science
- field is now similar to the pre-paradigm period, except the differences are smaller & more clearly defined
sometimes this period gives rise to the proposal of a new paradigm - the new and old paradigms must then compete for their place within the scientific community
- scientists experience a ‘gestalt switch’ as the new paradigm alters perception
what is a paradigm?
the entire constellation of beliefs, values and techniques (and so on), shared by the members of a given scientific community
are paradigms incommensurable?
incommensurable = not having joint measurability, it is not comparable in size or value
paradigms are incomparable because their problems are not equal, and because of the different meanings of concepts, there is only partial communication between them
