Download Science. Mythology. A set of interrelated propositions from which


Science. Mythology.
o A set of interrelated propositions from which testable hypotheses can be deduced.

How to distinguish science from non-science: acceptance and rejection by the scientific
community.
o Alternative epistemological views such as correspondence and coherence. The
status of morality, facts and values.
o Criteria of acceptability: form, logical structure of knowledge; evidentiary basis
of knowledge.
o Principle of verification: a scientific question is one that can in principle be
answered through empirical observation.

Fundamental assumptions such as: the existence of an orderly world
accessible through the senses and known through empirical observation.

Fact/value dichotomy: how and why regular patterns hold in natural and
social processes vs. what is desirable. Enter Hume.

Scientific “why”: “under what conditions…?” “what is the relationship
between…?”

Scientific knowledge as verifiable:

Verification presupposes correct description.

Conceptual definition: e.g. mass= quantity of matter in a body in
relation to its inertia.

Conceptual reference: define the concept at issue via observation
to its referent.
o E.g. molecules postulated by kinetic theory of gases are not
directly observable, but they may be detected by measuring
the pressure they exert as predicted by the theory. Social
class?


Scientific language, like all language, frames and in some sense
determines perception. That is, concepts make some distinctions
more salient; laden in concepts are assumptions about what is
important and what is not, what counts as measurable, etc.
Knowledge as explanation and prediction.

1. If the volume of a gas is constant, then an increase in
temperature will be followed by an increase in pressure.

2. If a task is simple or well-learned, then an individual will
perform it better in the presence of others than in isolation.
o Change in one set of events  change in another set of events under conditions x,
y, z.

No specific reference to historical time—atemporal; no specific reference
to individuals—general and impersonal.
o How do I know when to stop explaining? In what sense does citing a general
causal rule about types of events answer the scientific “why” question?


Prediction  Explanation?

Hypothesis: abstract proposition from which observable events are
deduced. When hypotheses are derived from observations, they are called
empirical generalizations. Once they have been repeatedly tested and
verified, they become scientific laws. Observed and recorded specific
events are facts.

Scientific explanations describe the world by classifying phenomena
according to concepts; they explain and predict by showing how
predictions and facts follow from empirical generalizations or laws.

Specific events explained by  empirical generalizations/laws, in
turn explained by  general theories.

Theory: a set of interconnected principles/propositions having the
same form as but more general than laws. (theorieslawsfacts)

Confirmation of particular predictions not sufficient to confirm a
theory, since more than one theory may explain a particular
occurrence or empirical regularity.

Choice between competing theories: one theory is better than
another if a) it implies fewer statements and assumptions, b) it has
a broader range, c) generates more accurate predictions.
Science as product:
o Differentiation of individual sciences through their objects: physics matter and
energy; biology life in plants and animals; sociology social processes.
o Is causal explanation the same thing as understanding?

E.g. The connection between temperature and pressure  (the underlying
process described by) kinetic theory of gases: increase in temp  increase
in kinetic energy velocity of molecules

What is causality: change in one event-type “brings about,” produces” a
change in another event-type.

Evaluate his charge against Freudian psychoanalysis that it is self-sealing:
no possibility of observable and testable predictions no explanation.

Prediction without explanation: folk wisdom on weather change, aspirin,
elections, movement of stars prior to Newton.

E.g. rickets and the patterns, correlations prior to the description of
underlying causal process.
o Science as cumulative and progressive.

Truth, validity, observable evidence.

Fallibilism.

The parable of the turkey: regularity is not sufficient for certainty.
o Science as process

Mutual conditioning and interaction of theory and research.

Empiricism: something will count as knowledge only if it can in principle
be observed through the senses directly or indirectly under specific
conditions stipulated by experiments.


Contrasting sources of epistemic authority: tradition, speculation,
intuition, revelation.

A question will be accepted as a scientific one only if it is in
principle empirically resolvable, where this means the possibility
of specifying experimental conditions under which to test
hypotheses.
Objectivity:

Interpretation and observation. Objective observation free from
bias and emotion is not possible. Our perceptions are framed by
our interpretations. That is: we do not see the world “as is,” but
rather we see the world as ___.

Scientific objectivity: intersubjective agreement.
o Agreement concerning the interpretation of the results of
experiments in the scientific community will determine the
objectivity of such results.
o The case of Cyril Burt: 1950s theories concerning the
genetic basis and hereditary nature of intelligence. Studies
conducted on identical twins brought up apart.

Scientific control: procedures to eliminate as much and far as
possible biases that may distort or skew the formation and
interpretation of experiments and theories.
o Control group: those who do not receive the treatment in
question.
o Double-blind investigation to control for placebo effects.
o Random selection.
o Withholding information from test subjects who might
respond differently if they knew the goals of research.
o Independent observers.
o Recorders to avoid omission or commission.

Social vs. Natural science?
o Problems of 1st person view.
o Criteria…
o Psychoanalysis
Theory
Prediction (hypothesis)
Empirical
Generalization
Observation/Facts

Research methods in SS:
o Sample survey:

Aim at a specific group, that is, population: the totality of the phenomenon
under study.

Selection of s statistically valid sample: the sample must be representative
of the whole group in order for observed result to be generalized.

Survey the sample through questionnaires, interviews, eliciting of
attitudes: collection of data.

Relationships among variables are detected.

Broad spectrum of the population at a specific point in time: crosssectional. (e.g. pre-election polls.)

Continuous study over extended period of time to determine
changing attitudes, etc.: longitudinal.
o Case study: in depth study of particular unit: person, family, group…. Entire
population of the unit is surveyed. Especially useful when the unit is relatively
rare.
o Participant observation: when the researcher takes part in the life of the unit.
o Experiment: keep all variables except one; change that variable; observe the
result. Set up control groups.