Class notes
philosophy of science lecture notes, summary's of readings and book
- Course
- Institution
- Book
philosophy of science lecture notes, summaries of readings and book, as well as practice questions and aditional coments
[Show more]
Connected book
Book Title:
Author(s):
- Edition:
- ISBN:
- Edition:
More summaries for
-
Samenvatting Routledge Contemporary Introductions to Philosophy- Philosophy of Social Science, ISBN: 9781032075860 Wetenschapsfilosofie (S_WF)
-
Samenvatting Routledge Contemporary Introductions to Philosophy- Philosophy of Social Science, ISBN: 9781032075860 Philosophy of science (S_CSPP)
Seller
Follow
GIG1308
Content preview
PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCEWEEK 1
LECTURE 1 – INTRO
Science vs. non-science
• What distinguishes science from non-science?
• What’s special about scientific knowledge as opposed to other kinds of information or
knowledge?
=> This is one example of a philosophy of science question
Philosophy of science
Philosophy of science – investigating the social sciences
• What distinguishes science from non-science?
• How does one get from observations to theories, models, explanations?
• What is a (good) scientific theory, explanation, model?
• Is scientific knowledge objective? What is objectivity?
• What role is there for values in science, if any?
• Are there ethical or other limits to science?
• What goals should science serve?
Social science – investigating the social world
The demarcation problem
Logical positivism;
• Vienna Circle: group of scientists (in early 20th century Vienna) reflecting on philosophical
questions about science
• Aim: development of a strictly scientific worldview– they believed that real knowledge
should be based on observations
• Against speculative philosophy, religious ideas, traditional worldviews
Side note
• Why the word ‘positivism’?
• From ‘positive’, in the sense of restricting self to ‘what is posited’, ‘what is given’, ‘what is
laid down’, - don’t go beyond empirical
- not in the sense of ‘happy’, ‘in a good mood’, ’constructive
Ideals – 2 needed things
• Strict empiricism: knowledge can only come from (empirical) observation – senses; eyes..
- No place for speculative claims that are not based on observation!
• Use of formal logic and mathematics to create an ideal and precise language for science
- To guard against unwarranted terminology and against leaps to conclusions and
unsupported theories
Core ideas 1;
Analytic vs. synthetic statements
, Analytic: true/false just on the basis of the meaning of the words used. (conventions
for how we use words and symbols) – it needs to be part of the definition, all
definitions
• Examples ‘All bachelors are unmarried.’
• Examples ‘5 + 7 = 12’
• Examples ‘A ‘lusitanism’ is a word or expression derived from the Portuguese
language and incorporated into another language.
• Definitions, logic, and mathematics are all analytic statements - Empirical scientific
research is the only way of determining the truth or falsity of these statements
Synthetic: true/false on the basis of the meaning of the words used and what the
world is like. (describe the world)
• Examples ‘Marc is a bachelor.’
• Examples ‘All polar bears are white.’ – not part of definition/ meaning of bear that
it might be right that’s why its not analytic
-empirical sciences are concerned with synthetic statements
• Synthetic statements describe the world, analytic ones only concern conventions for how we
use words and symbols
Core ideas 2:
• An ideal and precise language of science
Gate-keeping: only statements that are firmly based on empirical observation belong
in the language of science
The verifiability criterion of meaning: the meaning of a synthetic statement is its
method of verification – in order for a statement to be scientific it needs to be
verifiable (you need to describe something that can be done that describes what is true
or false)
Verifiable (meaningful) or not?
• ‘This rock falls down with an acceleration of 9,8 m/s2.’ – verifiable
• ‘Voter turnout in the last election was at an historical low.’ – verifiable ( assuming
we have the historical record)
• ‘This culture is strongly matriarchal.’- it isn’t but it can be made into one
• ‘The nothing nothings.’ – not verifiable
• ‘God is almighty, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. – not verifiable because not
observable
• Verifiability as demarcation criterion
•Only statements that satisfy the verifiability criterion are scientific, other statements
are non-scientific – to show whether true of false + draws line between science
• (Logic, mathematics, and statistics help to formulate scientific statements in a
precise manner.)
Turtorial definition –
- Verification criteria – (verifiability) – empirically based, it is necessary that its
observable proof not only theoretical.
- the meaning of a sentence consist in its method of verification, scientific
statements must always be connected to empirical observations (something that
happed and is real)
, - Method – induction; logical method out of many observed methods you can draw a
conclusion (all swans are white- you make a specific number of observations and base
your results on that induction problem!)
- Problem of verifiability; draws conclusions before knowing the correct result, this is
done by reconfirmation of theory, without allowing opportunity to be wrong (over
generalising)(problem for poper)
Core ideas 3:
Inductive method: from observations to general theories and empirical regularities /
laws
• Observations give rise to hypotheses and theories
• And they serve to support / confirm them
• Let the data (observations) ‘speak for themselves’
• Example: behaviourism
- Dog is conditioned to show responses
• Exclusive focus on observable behaviour in response
to external stimuli (In psychology)
• Nothing about internal cognitive processes
• Because those are unobservable / unverifiable
Karl Popper’s core ideas
• Fallibility and tentativeness of human knowledge
• Dogmatic vs. critical thinking – science is about looking for errors and trying to correct
them/ to prove theory's wrong
- Believed all can make mistakes – scientific knowledge always tentative
Problem of induction;
• Reasoning from individual observations to general conclusions is logically invalid.
- inductive reasoning; go from a limited number of observations to a general
conclusion ( not strictly valid as you make a limited number of observations eg; all
swans are white)
• So induction can never completely support general scientific laws and theories.
- Popper: no use for induction in science! – as there is always some uncertainty
Falsifiability as demarcation criterion;
• Scientific knowledge is falsifiable knowledge. – you need to be able to prove a claim wrong
• Scientific statements ought to be able to ‘clash’ with the world.
• It must be possible to prove them false through experiments and observation
1. Unicorns exist and don’t exist. – false not falsifiable
2. Unicorns either exist or they don’t. – not falsifiable it allows for everything
3. Unicorns exist. – not falsifiable – as you cant know for sure that they don’t exist
4. Unicorns don’t exist. –falsifiable
Examples of unfalsifiable theories;
• Freud: Every little boy has an Oedipus complex, or is in denial of it. (always came
up for excuses of Why it did fit their theory)
• Marx: changes in the means of production lead to changes in labor conditions,
which lead to changes in political power, which in turn lead to changes in ideology –
, (what popper believed was wrong) people that believed in so always would come up
with explanation as to why it did not occur
Example of a falsified theory
Secularization Thesis (popular in 19th-20th century sociology): Through
Enlightenment modernization, rationalization, combined with the ascent of science
and technology, religious authority diminishes in all aspects of social life and
governance. – POPER BELIVES THIS SHOULD BE REJECTED
Scientific method for Popper
• Science is about formulating theories (conjectures) in such a way that they can be falsified
by empirical observations.
• Theories must then be tested as rigorously as possible (attempted refutations).
• We accept those theories that have survived testing (so far)
Comparison: Popper vs. Positivism
Positivism – mainly about gatekeeping – falsifiability
• Fallibility and risk-taking
• Theoretical conjectures as starting points
• Get rid of bad ideas as you go
Vs
Popper - verifiability
• Striving for certainty
• Observations as starting points
• Don’t let any bad ideas in
Course overview & organization:
Course theme 1: Naturalism
• Are the social sciences different from the natural sciences? And, if so, how?
• Studying people and society vs. studying physical particles, objects, systems
• Insider vs. outsider perspective (in explaining human behaviour)
• Understanding vs. explaining
• Are there laws of nature, causality, mechanisms in the social sciences?
Course theme 2: Reductonism
• Is social science reducible to psychology and neuroscience, or even further to the natural
sciences?
• Or are they irreducible and are social-level descriptions, theories, and explanations
ineliminable?
• Methodological individualism
• Is talk about ‘families’, ‘organizations’, ‘institutions’, ‘nations’, etc. shorthand for talk
about individuals and their actions?
• Should a good explanation be couched in terms of individuals?
Course theme 3: Normativity
Normality of social science;
• Should (and can) social science be value- free?
• What does that mean and what does it have to do with objectivity, neutrality, and
trustworthiness?
Normality in social science;
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller GIG1308. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $8.74. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
79751 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now