Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- rem4:philosophy_of_science_i [2010/03/24 16:00] – thorisson
+++ rem4:philosophy_of_science_i [2024/04/29 13:33] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-=====Readings=====
-You are expected to have read and thoroughly learned the following texts and topics:
-==Nature & Evolution of Science==
-  * http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-progress/
-==Thomas Kuhn==
-  * Short overview: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9002756/Thomas-S-Kuhn
-  * Longer overview: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/thomas-kuhn/
-  * Example of a paradigm shift a la Kuhn: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-261582/plate-tectonics#936104.hook
-==Logical Positivism==
-  * Short definition: http://nostalgia.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_positivism
-==Karl Popper==
-  * Short overivew: http://nostalgia.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper
-\\
-==== ====
-Additionally:
-Use the [[http://plato.stanford.edu/|Stanford Encylopedia of Philosophy]] and Google to further explore concepts and ideas that we encounter.
-Philosophy of Science with humor: http://www.science.gb.net/
-Philosophy of Science hub:
-\\
@@ Line 42: / Line 12: @@
 | Information (Icel. upplýsingar)  | Processed and prepared data -- "data with a purpose" |
 | Randomness | It is hypothesized in quantum physics that the universe may possibly be built on a truly random foundation, which means that some things are by their very nature unpredictable. Randomness in the aggregate, however, does seem to follow some predictable laws (c.f. the concept of "laws of probability"). |
-| Sampling  | Sampling theory uses statistics to tell us \\ (a) how many random measurements we need to make to make a prediction about a whole group of which they are members and \\ (b) how reliable the results are given the particular methods of sampling and recorded variations in the data. \\(Notice: not the same as Nyquist's sampling theorem, which states that to capture a waveform accuractly in digital form you need to sample it at twice its frequency.) |
+| Sampling  | Sampling theory uses statistics to tell us \\ (a) how many random measurements we need to make to make a prediction about a whole group of which they are members and \\ (b) how reliable the results are given the particular methods of sampling and recorded variations in the data. \\ (Notice: not the same as Nyquist's sampling theorem, which states that to capture a waveform accuractly in digital form you need to sample it at more than twice its frequency.) |
-| Empiricism   | All knowledge comes through the senses |
+| Empiricism   | All knowledge comes (ultimately) through the senses |
 | Deduction (Icel. afleiðsla)   | "The facts speak for themsevles". \\ In deduction it's impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false. "You've got the facts, all you have to do is put them together, draw a natural conclusion." \\ Usually goes from the general to the particular. |
 | Induction (Icel. aðleiðsla, tilleiðsla)   | A generalization from a set of observations. \\ Generalization can be about a class of observed phenomena or about a particular unobserved phenomenon that is part of the class. |
@@ Line 62: / Line 32: @@
 | Roger Bacon \\ (1214 – 1294)  | English philosopher. \\ One of the earliest proponents of the scientific method (empiricism). |
 | Descartes \\ (1596 - 1650)  | French philosopher. \\ Enormous influence on math (inventor of analytic geometry), science, philosophy of mind and philosophy in general. "I think, therefore I am." "Cogito ergo sum." |
-| Sir Francis Bacon \\ (1561 - 1626)  | English philosopher. \\ Influential proponent of the scientific method. |
+| Sir Francis Bacon \\ (1561 - 1626)  | English philosopher. \\ Influential proponent of the scientific method. Emphasized induction as the main principle of scientific progress.  |
 | Galileo Galilei \\ (1564 - 1642)  | Italian philosopher and polymath. \\ Influence on the use of quantitative measurements and the use of math. |
 | Karl Popper \\ (1902 - 1994)  | Philosopher. Most famous for his claim that theories can only be tested through the falsification of hypotheses. \\ Book: The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1959) |
 | Thomas Kuhn \\ (1922 - 1996)  | Philosopher. Most famous for his theory of scientific change as intermittent challenges to the status quo. \\ Book: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) |
+| Imre Lakatos \\ (1922 - 1974)  | Philosopher. Proposed a "realistic" recombination of Kuhn's and Popper's views on science, focusing on research programs as a key organising concept. |
 \\
 \\
@@ Line 75: / Line 45: @@
 ====Falsification of Hypotheses====
 | Very powerful method  | Given theory X, if one can deduce a relationship that has to hold between A and B, where A and B are the domain of a particular theory, and that relationship is falisifed through an experimental procedure that can be replicated by anyone, then obvioulsy theory X has been disproven. |
-| Problem  | Although scientific knowledge is the most reliable knowledge there is, most scientific theories at any point in time are theories in flux. |
+| Problem  | Although scientific knowledge is the most reliable knowledge there is, most scientific theories at any point in time are theories in flux. But that is the key strength of scientific knowledge (over e.g. fairytales, urban myths, religion, etc.) -- so perhaps more of a feature than a bug! |
 | Theories in flux  | Counter to what many think, theories almost never pop out complete and finished. The become assembled piece by piece, until there are so few pieces left that someone figures out the full picture. In the mean time, however, it is easy to falisfy hypotheses based on the theory, which, in the early stages, may not be much of a theory. |
 | Science builds theories  | The theory - hypothesis distinction is a convenience. In reality this is a continuum. Which means that theories are in various forms of growth. |
@@ Line 111: / Line 81: @@
 ==== The key to the advancement of scientific knowledge====
-| Theory: The coherent story  | The ability of individuals and groups to create "coherent stories" of how phenomena in the world are connected and produce rigorous models that support the stories is a necessary condition for scientific progress. |
+| Theory: The coherent story  | A scientific theory provides a consistent story explaining the causal relationships between a set of observable or hidden factors. The ability of individuals and groups to create coherent "stories" of how phenomena in the world are connected, and produce rigorous models that support the stories, is a necessary condition for scientific progress.  |
 | Support of evidence  | The strongest form of evidence is rigorous hypothesis testing using scientific experimentation: clearly thought-out tests of the claims that naturally fall out of the Theory to be tested. It helps if the hypotheses concern unexpected results. |
+| Rigor  | A theory is more rigorous than another if it includes more clear definitions, tighter relationships with observable and measurable factors that are more independent of external factors (such as the observer/measurer) than the other. The use of mathematics is not a guarantee for rigor. |
 | Creating hypotheses  | Use both induction and deduction |
 | Creating experiments  | Use logic and tradition |
@@ Line 118: / Line 89: @@
 | Interpreting results  | Use rationality. Follow the data! ("Follow the duck, not the theory of the duck.") |
-\\
-\\
-\\
-\\
-\\
-\\
-\\
-\\
-\\
-\\
-\\
 \\
 \\
@@ Line 139: / Line 99: @@
 \\
 EOF