natural
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
natural [2014/09/26 05:31] kai [Scientific Revolutions] |
natural [2014/10/29 07:48] (current) kai [The Hypothetico-Deductive Model] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | ====== Natural Science ====== | + | **[[start|<< Up]]** |
| - | **subject areas:** | + | ====== Natural Science ====== |
| + | ---- | ||
| + | ===== Subject Areas ===== | ||
| * physics | * physics | ||
| Line 32: | Line 34: | ||
| | + | inductive reasoning | | + | inductive reasoning | ||
| | | | | | | ||
| - | | hypothesis | + | | hypothesis, of the form |
| + | | "whenever ..., ..." | ||
| | | | | | | ||
| | |<---------------------- | | |<---------------------- | ||
| Line 51: | Line 54: | ||
| </code> | </code> | ||
| - | ==== Notes: ==== | + | ==== Notes ==== |
| - | * it is descriptive, not normative:\\ our model does not tell scientists what they __should be__ doing, rather it tells us what scientists __are doing__; | + | * it is __descriptive__, not __normative__:\\ our model does not tell scientists what they //should be// doing, rather it tells us what scientists //are doing//; |
| - | * the prediction is derived from the hypothesis using logic:\\ e.g. "All apples fall" (= hypothesis) **&** "This object is an apple" **=>** "This object will fall" (= prediction) | + | * the prediction is derived from the hypothesis using logic -- e.g.\\ "All apples fall" (= hypothesis) **&** "This object is an apple" **=>** "This object will fall" (= prediction) |
| - | * if the outcome of the experiment does not agree with the prediction, it may be an __auxiliary hypothesis__ that has been falsified,\\ e.g. "this object" might rise, because it actually is a balloon and not an apple; | + | * if the outcome of the experiment does not agree with the prediction, it may be an __auxiliary hypothesis__ that has been falsified -- e.g.\\ "this object" might rise, because it actually is a balloon and not an apple; |
| - | * contrary to what many people think, science requires __creativity and imagination__, especially at the points marked **+** in the diagram: e.g. | + | * contrary to what many people think, science requires __creativity and imagination__, especially at the points marked **+** in the diagram -- e.g. |
| * to invent an hypothesis (-- as in the example of the two maternity wards), and | * to invent an hypothesis (-- as in the example of the two maternity wards), and | ||
| * to come up with a suitable experiment; | * to come up with a suitable experiment; | ||
| - | * to be accepted as scientific knowledge, an hypothesis must be __testable__: an hypothesis which cannot be tested may be true, but it is not scientific,\\ e.g. neither "There is a God" nor "There is no God" is a scientific claim; | + | * to be accepted as scientific knowledge, an hypothesis must be __testable__: an hypothesis which cannot be tested may be true, but it is not scientific -- e.g.\\ neither "There is a God" nor "There is no God" is a scientific claim; |
| + | |||
| + | * in some areas it may not be possible to perform experiments, so instead for the testing we depend on further observations -- e.g. | ||
| + | * in astronomy, | ||
| + | * in biology, because of ethical problems; | ||
| * experiments in science must be __repeatable__ and the hypothesis must have been subjected to testing by other scientists -- that is how __individual knowledge__ becomes __shared knowledge__; | * experiments in science must be __repeatable__ and the hypothesis must have been subjected to testing by other scientists -- that is how __individual knowledge__ becomes __shared knowledge__; | ||
| - | * an hypothesis, or various hypotheses, may be part of a __theory__, and the theory may be represented in a __model__, which helps us to visualise the theory;\\ as our confidence in a theory/model grows, we come to accept the entities postulated in it,\\ e.g. the success of the atomic theory has led us to believe in electrons; | + | * an hypothesis, or various hypotheses, may be part of a __theory__, and the theory may be represented in a __model__, which helps us to visualise the theory;\\ as our confidence in a theory/model grows, we come to accept the entities postulated in it -- e.g.\\ the success of the atomic theory has led us to believe in electrons. |
| ===== Scientific Revolutions ===== | ===== Scientific Revolutions ===== | ||
| - | |||
| it may //appear// that scientific knowledge accumulates steadily, always increasing,\\ **but** there are times when in some area all of the knowledge is discarded and scientists start again; | it may //appear// that scientific knowledge accumulates steadily, always increasing,\\ **but** there are times when in some area all of the knowledge is discarded and scientists start again; | ||
| * so periods of __normal science__ alternate with __scientific revolutions__ (Thomas Kuhn, 1962): | * so periods of __normal science__ alternate with __scientific revolutions__ (Thomas Kuhn, 1962): | ||
| - | | + | |
| * in periods of normal science, scientists work within a __paradigm__: | * in periods of normal science, scientists work within a __paradigm__: | ||
| - | * the paradigm determines what answers are being looked for, and even which questions can be asked -- | + | * the paradigm determines what answers are being looked for, and even which questions can be asked -- |
| - | * e.g. telepathy and telekinesis are not part of the present scientific paradigm; | + | * e.g. telepathy and telekinesis are not part of the present scientific paradigm; |
| - | * a scientific revolution is a __paradigm shift__\\ (-- the idea of a paradigm shift is used quite generally nowadays): | + | * a scientific revolution is a __paradigm shift__ (-- the idea of a paradigm shift is used quite generally nowadays): |
| * there are no agreed standards even how to decide between rival hypotheses, | * there are no agreed standards even how to decide between rival hypotheses, | ||
| * so it is 'every man for himself'; | * so it is 'every man for himself'; | ||
| examples of scientific revolutions: | examples of scientific revolutions: | ||
| - | * the phlogiston theory (that heat is a substance, with negative weight) >> kinetic theory of heat, | + | * the phlogiston theory (that heat is a substance, with negative weight) > > kinetic theory of heat, |
| - | * Ptolemy's geocentric model of the universe >> Copernicus's heliocentric model >> modern cosmology: no centre, | + | * Ptolemy's geocentric model of the universe > > Copernicus's heliocentric model > > modern cosmology: no centre, |
| - | * Aristotelian physics >> Newtonian physics >> Einstein's Theory of Relativity; | + | * Aristotelian physics > > Newtonian physics > > Einstein's Theory of Relativity; |
| preceding the establishment of a paradigm in (an area of) a science may be a long __pre-science__: | preceding the establishment of a paradigm in (an area of) a science may be a long __pre-science__: | ||
| * like a constant revolution: everyone starts for himself, | * like a constant revolution: everyone starts for himself, | ||
| - | * has often involved myths, superstitions, //etc.// -- e.g.\\ astrology >> astronomy,\\ alchemy >> chemistry,\\ creationism >> theory of evolution. | + | * has often involved myths, superstitions, //etc.// -- e.g. |
| + | * astrology > > astronomy, | ||
| + | * alchemy > > chemistry, | ||
| + | * creationism > > theory of evolution. | ||
| <code> | <code> | ||
| - | pre-science ----------> normal science ----- | + | pre-science ----------> normal science ----- |
| ----> working within a paradigm | | ----> working within a paradigm | | ||
| | | | | | | ||
| | | | | | | ||
| - | | scientic revolution <--------- | + | | scientic revolution <--------- |
| ----- a paradigm shift | ----- a paradigm shift | ||
| </code> | </code> | ||
natural.1411709500.txt.gz · Last modified: 2014/09/26 05:31 by kai
Page Tools
