Differences

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

--- rem4:philosophy_of_science_i [2014/08/21 10:58] – old revision restored (2014/08/19 12:47) thorisson
+++ rem4:philosophy_of_science_i [2024/04/29 13:33] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 12: / 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 32: / 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) |
@@ Line 45: / 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. |