Science Exam 1

Describe some of the advantages and disadvantages of the antirealist view of scientific theories

some advantages of it is that they more so believe in the theories as proven. Although this could also be a disadvantage given that there is not a firm way to prove or disprove a theory. Meaning they take it too much at face value when theories are often replaced.

Explain the difference between a theoretical discipline and an applied discipline. Give a least one example to illustrate your explanation.

A theoretical discipline is an abstract concept that defines a term in an academic discipline. Theoretical is for pure curiousity reasons rather than an actual physical reason. An applied discpline is a science that applies existing scientific knowledge to develop more practical applications. Applied is used to answer a specific question that has direct applications to the world. Applied is used in things like answering questions about medicine while theoretical is about something that may happen rather than will.

Explain why scientific theories cannot be proven true.

Because although we believe in the world being uniform, theories can replace other theories. Unexpected changes have happened and will most likely continue to happen.

In what sense is the word 'science' like the word 'love'?

Because both have accepted definitions of it but no real physical explanation as to why it works the way it does.

According to Kuhn what are some characteristics of "good" theories?

First, a theory should be accurate: within its domain, that is, consequences deducible from a theory should be in demonstrated agreement with the results of existing experiments and observations. Second, a theory should be consistent, not only internally or with itself, but also with other currently accepted theories applicable to related aspects of nature. Third, it should have broad scope: in particular, a theory's consequences should extend far beyond the particular observations, laws, or subtheories it was initially designed to explain. Fourth, and closely related, it should be simple, bringing order to phenomena that in its absence would be individually isolated and, as a set, confused. Fifth--a somewhat less standard item, but one of special importance to actual scientific decisions--a theory should be fruitful of new research findings: it should, that is, disclose new phenomena or previously unnoted relationships among those already known.

in the arena of rationality? What is the difference between "hypothetico-deductive methods" and "covering-law methods" (e.g., predictions or explanations)? How did the fact that the uniformity of the nature cannot be proven force scientists to "hypothetico-deductive methods"? Which of these methods (covering-law or hypothetico-deductive) leads to statements that are logically proven true or false? Explain reasons for your answer.

Hypthetico-deductive: Hypothetical-deductive method (HD method) is a very important method for testing theories or hypotheses. The HD method is one of the most basic methods common to all scientific disciplines including biology, physics, and chemistry. Its application can be divided into five stages: 1. Form many hypotheses and evaluate each hypothesis 2. Select a hypothesis to be tested 3. Generate predications from the hypothesis 4. Use experiments to check whether predictions are correct 5. If the predictions are correct, then the hypothesis is confirmed. If not, the hypothesis is disconfirmed. HD reasoning involves starting with a general theory of all possible factors that might affect an outcome and forming ahypothesis; then deductions are made from that hypothesis to predict what might happen in an experiment. In scientific inquiry, HD reasoning is very important because, in order to solve science problems, you need to make hypotheses. Many hypotheses can't be tested directly; you have to deduce from a hypothesis and make predictions which can be tested through experiments. Covering-law methods: Model of explanation according to which to explain an event by reference to another event necessarily presupposes an appeal to laws or general propositions correlating events of the type to be explained (explananda) with events of the type cited as its causes or conditions (explanantia). It is rooted in David Hume's doctrine that, when two events are said to be causally related, all that is meant is that they instantiate certain regularities of succession that have been repeatedly observed to hold between such events in the past. This doctrine was given more rigorous expression by the logical positivist Carl Hempel (1905-1997). Question 1: It forced them to hypothetical methods because nothing is concrete in science, but it is something we tend to believe is uniform although it can be unpredictable. It makes it easier to know something through the ways of testing. It is easier for the HD method to "prove" (try not to use the word prove) something true through the testing of our predictions and hypothesis to get results

Explain the differences between a scientific law/principle and a scientific theory.

In general, a scientific law is the description of an observed phenomenon. It doesn't explain why the phenomenon exists or what causes it. The explanation of a phenomenon is called a scientific theory. It is a misconception that theories turn into laws with enough research

What factors (beyond the basic requirement of consistency with empirical data) are usually desirable for an "acceptable" theory?

It makes falsifiable predictions with consistent accuracy across a broad area of scientific inquiry (such as mechanics). It is well-supported by many independent strands of evidence, rather than a single foundation. It is consistent with preexisting experimental results and at least as accurate in its predictions as are any preexisting theories.

Positivism

Positivism is a philosophical theory stating that certain ("positive") knowledge is based on natural phenomena and their properties and relations. Thus, information derived from sensory experience, interpreted through reason and logic, forms the exclusive source of all certain knowledge.

Realist

Realist justifications of scientific rationality are anchored in the claim that scientific knowledge aspires to discover the truth about how things really are. Moreover, realists claim that if it is rational to accept a theory, it is equally rational to believe in the existence of the "theoretical entities" posited by such a theory, even though such theoretical entities cannot be directly observed.

Explain the difference between a 'realist' versus an 'antirealist' view of scientific theories.

Realists see philosophical anti-realists as making the classical pragmatists' blunder of confusing the process by which human inquiry leads to a particular belief as the rational belief to accept with what makes that belief acceptable. The pragmatist/empiricist position of the anti-realists provides a candidate for addressing the first issue (how we decide what to accept), but ignores the second (what makes that belief acceptable). From the empiricist/pragmatist anti-realists' point of view, there is no difference between these two; what makes a belief acceptable is just that: the process by which human inquiry leads to a particular belief as the rational one to accept. The realist disagrees: what leads a scientist to accept a belief is the empirical evidence (combined with the pragmatic virtues) -with that much of what the anti-realists say the realists agree- but the realist wants to add: what makes the process of inquiry settle on that particular belief is the fact that out of currently competing beliefs, it is closest to the truth.

Explain why scientific theories cannot even be proven false.

Same as why we can't prove them to be true, we don't know if the uniformity of the world will remain the same or not. If it did then we could prove it false. But prove is a strong word.

List & describe ways in which science is limited.

Science does not make moral judgements, aesthetic judgements, how to use scientific knowledge, or draw conclusion to supernatural things.

What three characteristics does Ratzsch suggest must be a part of any endeavor called 'science'? Explain how each of these characteristics plays a part in science. How did Semmelweis exhibit any of these characteristics of science?

Science is empirical. based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic. Science is rational. implies the conformity of one's beliefs with one's reasons to believe, and of one's actions with one's reasons for action Science is objective. Objectivity in science is a value that informs how science is practiced and how scientific truths are discovered. It is the idea that scientists, in attempting to uncover truths about the natural world, must aspire to eliminate personal biases, a priori commitments, emotional involvement, etc.

What does Ratzsch mean when he states that "theories are underdetermined by data"?

The data can in principle be explained by many different mutually incompatible theories

anti realism

These anti-realist philosophers agree with the (non-philosophical) sociologist anti-realists that scientific beliefs are largely a "construction," but -in opposition to the sociologists- they deny that this construction is explained by social factors "external" to scientific knowledge. Instead they seek to justify a scientific rationality according to which a belief is adopted because it makes correct predictions about observable outcomes and displays other pragmatic virtues such as simplicity, breadth of scope, fertility, etc.

What are three presuppositions (from philosophy) that seem to be necessarily true in order for science to work?

These must be true of our universe if science is to work. Knowability - humans have the ability to understand the natural world. Nature is understandable. Uniformity - the same circumstances produce the same results time after time, and throughout the universe (even in places we cannot directly observe). Cause & effect - nature is predictable provided we know its laws and know all aspects of a given cause. Observable patterns in nature allow us to correctly infer unobservable phenomena.

How did science change from the 1600's to the early 1900's to deal with the objections to the Baconian conception of science?

We saw the formation of conceptual, methodological, and institutional approaches to the natural world that are recognizably like those of modern science. We moved into a more structured and organized method of collecting data.

What is a discipline? List some of the disciplines which students at CU can study.

a particular branch of scientific knowledge; "the science of genetics" science. natural history - the scientific study of plants or animals (more observational than experimental) usually published in popular magazines rather than in academic journals. Social sciences, natural sciences, applied sciences, etc.

Paradigm

a standard (a rubric) of a scientific achievement by which scientific work is conducted and evaluated.

Define and give examples of Thomas Kuhn's concept: paradigm.

a standard (a rubric) of a scientific achievement by which scientific work is conducted and evaluated. A paradigm is a standard, perspective, or set of ideas. A paradigm is a way of looking at something. The word paradigm comes up a lot in the academic, scientific, and business worlds. A new paradigm in business could mean a new way of reaching customers and making money.

Baconian Concept of science a) Describe the three steps of the Baconian view of scientific methodology. b) Describe how the Baconian conception of science follows Ratzsch's three necessary characteristics of science. c) Point out difficulties/errors in each of the three steps of the Baconian/traditional conception of science.

a) induction, experimentation, interpretation of data. b) It uses empirical methods, objectivity in using other research, and rationality with unbiased works. c) It collects too much data that is unnecessary and is overwhelming.

Explain the difference between "empiricism" and "using the empirical in science".

empirical science is using tested and experimented methods while using the empiricism is more so "the theory that all knowledge is derived from sense-experience"

Describe what is usually meant by the phase "scientific theory".

is a specific type of theory used in the scientific method. The term "theory" can mean something different, depending on whom you ask. It generally means that they are talking about the accepted theories that cannot be proven or disproved.

According to Ratzsch what is the source of scientific theories since it cannot be from logic (induction) alone?

is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested.

List some of the implications of a positivist view of nature.

knowledge is based on natural phenomena and their properties and relations. So anything that goes along with things based on our senses such as sight, hearing, touching, etc.

Define the phrase "empirical phenomena"

the nature that gains information by observation/examples. E.g. You gain what you learned about projectile motion when throwing the ball. You gain information of how the ball travels in air.