Sociology-beliefs-ideology and science Flashcards
What has been the impact of science?
Science has had an enormous impact on society over the last few centuries. Its achievements in medicine have eradicated many once fatal diseases. Many basic features of daily life-transport, communications, work and leisure-would be unrecognisable to our recent ancestors due to scientific and technological development. Most strikingly, science and technology have revolutionised economic productivity and raised our standard of living to previously undreamt height. This success has led to a widespread ‘faith in science’-a belief that it can ‘deliver the goods’
More recently, what are the views on science?
This ‘faith in science’ has been somewhat dimmed by a recognition that science may cause problems as well as solve them. Pollution, global warming and weapons of mass destruction are as much a product of science and technology as are space flight, ‘wonder drugs’ and the internet. While science may have helped to protect us from natural dangers such as disease and famine, it has created its own ‘manufactured risks’ that increasingly threaten the planet
What distinguishes science from other belief systems?
Both the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ effects of science demonstrate the key feature distinguishing it from other belief systems or knowledge claims-that is, its cognitive power. In other words, science enables us to explain, predict and control the world in a way that non-scientific or pre-scientific belief systems cannot do
Why does Karl Popper say science has been successful in explaining and controlling the world?
Because science is an ‘open belief system’ where every scientist’s theories are open to scrutiny, criticism and testing by others. Science is governed by the principle of falsificationism. That is, scientists set out to try and falsify existing theories deliberately seeking evidence that would disprove them. If the evidence form an experiment or observation contradicts a theory and shows it to be false, the theory can be discarded and the search for a better explanation can begin. In science, knowledge claims live or die by the evidence
In Popper’s view how does scientific understanding of the world grow?
Discarding falsified knowledge claims is what enables scientific understanding of the world to grow. Scientific knowledge is cumulative-it builds on the achievements of previous scientists to develop a greater and greater understanding of the world around us
What did Sir Isaac Newton say about scientific understanding?
‘If I have been able to see so far, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants’-that is, on the discoveries of his predecessors
Why are no scientific theories ever taken as definitely true?
Despite the achievements of great scientists, such as Newton, no theory is ever to be taken as definitely true-there is always a possibility that someone will produce evidence to disprove it. Eg for centuries it was held to be true that the sun revolved around the earth, until Copernicus demonstrated that this knowledge claim was false. In Popper’s view, the key thing about scientific knowledge is that it is not sacred or absolute truth-it can always be questioned, criticised, tested and perhaps shown to be false
What does Merton argue about science?
He argues that science can only thrive as a major social institution if it receives the support from other institutions and values-he argues this first occurred in England as a result of the values and attitudes created by the Protestant Reformation, especially Puritanism. The Puritans’ beliefs encouraged them to experiment and were attracted to the fact that science could produce technological inventions to improve the conditions of life. This new institution of science also received support from economic and military institutions
What is the CUDOS norm?
Merton argues, like Popper, that science as an institution or organised social activity needs an ‘ethos’ or set of norms that make scientists act in ways that serve the goal of increasing scientific knowledge. The four norms are communism, universalism, disinterestedness, and organised scepticism (CUDOS)
What is communism (CUDOS)?
Scientific knowledge is not private property. Scientists must share it with the scientific community (by publishing their findings); otherwise, knowledge cannot grow
What is universalism (CUDOS)?
The truth or falsity of scientific knowledge is judged by universal, objective criteria (such as testing), and not by the particular race, sex etc of the scientist who produces it
What is disinterestedness (CUDOS)?
This means being committed to discovering knowledge for its own sake. Having to publish their findings makes it harder for scientists to practice fraud, since it enables others to check their claims
What is organised scepticism (CUDOS)?
No knowledge claim is regarded as ‘sacred’. Every idea is open to questioning, criticism and objective investigation
How does religion differ from science?
While scientific knowledge is provisional, open to challenge and potentially disprovable, religion claims to have special, perfect knowledge of the absolute truth. Its knowledge is literally sacred and religious organisations claim to hold it on God’s divine authority. This means it cannot be challenged and those who do may be punished for their heresy. It also means religious knowledge does not change, unlike scientific knowledge, therefore it does not grow
How does Horton explain the difference between science and religion?
He distinguishes between open and closed belief systems. Like Popper, he sees science as an open belief system-where knowledge claims are open to criticism and can be disproved by testing. By contrast, religion, magic and many other belief systems are closed. They make knowledge claims that cannot successfully be overturned, When fundamental beliefs are threatened, they use ‘get out clauses’ that reinforce the system and prevent it being disproved
What was Evans-Pritchard’s study?
His classic anthropological study of the Azande people of the Sudan illustrates Horton’s idea of a self-reinforcing, closed belief system
What do the Azande believe?
Like Westerners, the Azande believe that natural events have natural causes. However, unlike most Westerners, the Azande do not believe in coincidence or chance, so when misfortune befalls the Azande, they may explain it in terms of witchcraft. Someone-probably a jealous neighbour-is practicing witch craft
How do the Azande find out the truth about whether someone is practicing witchcraft?
The injured party may make an accusation against the suspected witch and the matter may be resolved by consulting the prince’s magic poison oracle. Here, the prince’s diviner will administer a potion (benge) to a chicken, at the same time asking the benge whether the accused is the source of the witchcraft and telling it to kill the chicken if the answer is ‘yes’. If the chicken dies, the sufferer can go and publicly demand the witchcraft to stop
Why does the poison oracle usually end the problem with witchcraft?
Because the Azande regard witchcraft as a psychic power coming from a substance located in the witch’s intestines, and it is believed possible that the witch is doing harm unintentionally and unconsciously. This allows the accused to proclaim their surprise and horror, to apologise and promise that there will be no further bewitching
What does Evans-Pritchard argue about the Azande’s beliefs on witchcraft?
Argues this belief system performs useful social functions. It not only clears the air and prevents grudges, but it encourages neighbours to behave considerately towards one another to reduce the risk of an accusation. Also since the Azande believe witchcraft to be hereditary, children have a vested interest in keeping their parents in line, since a successful accusation against the parent also damages the child’s reputation. As such, the belief system is an important social control mechanism ensuring conformity and cooperation
What type of belief system does Evan’s Pritchard argue the Azande’s beliefs are?
Closed system. It is highly resistant to challenges and cannot be overturned by evidence. Eg, non-believers may argue if benge killed the chicken without the diviner first addressing the potion, this would be a decisive test showing the oracle did not work. However, for the Azande, such outcome would prove it was not good benge. ‘The very fact of the fowl dying proves to them its badness’ so the rest doesn’t disprove the belief system in their eyes-it reinforces it. They are trapped in their own ‘idiom of belief’ ow way of thinking. Because they accept the system’s basic assumptions, they cannot challenge it
What does Polanyi argue?
Argues that all belief systems have three devices to sustain themselves in the face of apparently contradictory evidence: circularity, subsidiary explanations and denial of legitimacy to rivals
How does circularity act as a device to sustain a belief system?
Each idea in the system is explained in terms of another idea within the system and so on, round and round
How do subsidiary explanations act as a device to sustain a belief system?
For example, if the oracle fails, it may be explained away as due to incorrect use of the benge
How does denial of legitimacy to rivals act as a device to sustain a belief system?
Belief systems reject alternative world-views by refusing to grant any legitimacy to their basic assumptions, for example, creationism rejects outright the evolutionists’ knowledge-claim that the earth is billions of years old, and therefore that species have gradually evolved rather than all having been created
Despite Popper’s view of science as open and critical, what do other writers argue?
That science itself can be seen as a self-sustaining or closed system of belief, eg Polanyi argues that all belief systems reject fundamental challenges to their knowledge claims - science is no different, as the case of Dr Velikovsky indicates
What is one explanation for scientists’ refusal even to consider such challenges?
The explanation comes from a historian of science, Kuhn, who argues that a mature science such as geology, biology or physics is based on a set of shared assumptions that he calls a paradigm
What are paradigms?
They tell scientists what reality is like, what problems to study and what methods and equipment to use, what will count as evidence, and even what answers they should find when they conduct research. For most of the time, scientists are engaged in normal science, which Kuhn likens to puzzle solving - the paradigm lays down the broad outlines and the scientists’ job is to carefully fill in the details. Those who do so successfully are rewarded with bigger research grants, professorships, Nobel Prizes and so on
How important are paradigms to science?
Scientific education and training is a process of being socialised into faith in the truth of the paradigm, and a successful career depends on working within the paradigm. For these reasons, any scientist who challenges the fundamental assumptions of the paradigm, as Velikovsky did, is likely to be ridiculed and hounded out of the profession-others in the scientific community will no longer regard them as a scientist at all
How does science ever develop if you cannot challenge the fundamental assumptions of a paradigm?
The only exceptions to this are during rare periods that Kuhn describes as a scientific revolution, when faith in the truth of the paradigm has already been undermined by an accumulation of anomalies-results that the paradigm cannot account for. Only then do scientists become open to radically new ideas