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 05:55] kai [Notes:] |
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. | + | * 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) |
| - | * "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. | + | * 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; |
| - | * "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. | ||
| Line 65: | Line 66: | ||
| * 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. | + | * 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; |
| - | * 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 some areas it may not be possible to perform experiments, so instead for the testing we depend on further observations -- e.g. | ||
| Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
| * 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. | + | * 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. |
| - | * the success of the atomic theory has led us to believe in electrons; | + | |
| ===== Scientific Revolutions ===== | ===== Scientific Revolutions ===== | ||
| Line 86: | Line 85: | ||
| * 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'; | ||
| Line 97: | Line 96: | ||
| 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> | ||
natural.1411710939.txt.gz · Last modified: 2014/09/26 05:55 by kai
Page Tools
