Science and time

Smooth progress

time

pro

gre

ss

progress

realistic irrealistic

pragmatism relativismcriticalnaive

truths

cumulate

classical

empiricism and

rationalism

theories

approach

truth

Peirce

Lenin

scientific realism

practical

success

competing

theories are

incommesurable

scientific

anarchismRescher

Kuhn

LaudanFeyerbend

Progress in science

• Is scientific knowledge progressive?

• Has scientific knowledge always grown? In this respect, how do the natural sciences compare with other Areas of Knowledge, for example, history, the human sciences, ethics and the arts?

• Could there ever be an ‘end’ to science? In other words, could we reach a point where everything important in a scientific sense is known?

• If so, what might be the consequences of this?

Thomas Kuhn

(1922 – 1996):

Scientific revolutions

The progress in science happens

through revolutions.

The structure of scientific

revolutions

• Thomas Kuhn is most famous for his book

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

(1962) in which he presented the idea that

science does not evolve gradually toward

truth, but instead undergoes periodic

revolutions which he calls "paradigm

shifts."

Some terminology

• Normal science

• Scientific crisis

• Scientific revolution

• Paradigm

• Anomaly

• Auxiliary hypothesis

Normal science

• during periods of what Kuhn calls normal

science the vast majority of scientists work

within the dominant paradigm without

seriously questioning it.

• Most scientists are bricklayers patiently

filling in the details and extending the body

of scientific knowledge.

Forcing nature into the conceptual

boxes• A scientific community cannot practice its trade without some set of

received beliefs. – These beliefs form the foundation of the "educational initiation that

prepares and licenses the student for professional practice".

– The nature of the "rigorous and rigid" preparation helps ensure that the received beliefs exert a "deep hold" on the student's mind.

• Normal science "is predicated on the assumption that the scientific community knows what the world is like" —scientists take great pains to defend that assumption.

• To this end, "normal science often suppresses fundamental novelties because they are necessarily subversive of its basic commitments".

• Research is "a strenuous and devoted attempt to force nature into the conceptual boxes supplied by professional education".

Scientific crisis

• During periods of scientific crisis there are

likely to be violent arguments between

those who adhere to the old paradigm and

those who advocate the new one.

Scientific revolution

• A scientific revolution takes place when

scientists become dissatisfied with the

prevailing paradigm, and put forward a

completely new way of looking at things.

The shift from the geocentric to the

heliocentric model of the universe

in the sixteenth century.

Replacement of Aristotelian physics by

Newtonian mechanics in the seventeeth

century.

The replacement of the Newtonian

mechanics by Einstein’s theory of

relativity in the early twentieth century.

Scientific revolutions

time

pro

gre

ss

normal science

revolution

normal science

revolution

Summary of Kuhn’s position

1. During periods of normal science, most scientists do not question the paradigm in which they are operating and focus instead on solving problems.

2. The history of science suggests that, rather than progressing smoothly, science goes through a series of revolutionary jumps.

3. During periods of scientific crisis, there is no purely rational way of deciding between rival paradigms.

Assessing Kuhn’s position

• Is a normal scientist, as Kuhn describes

him, a badly thought or simple minded

scientist? Shouldn’t scientists always be

critical? This is what Karl Popper claims.

Will everything we believe

eventually be falsified?

• It is sometimes taken to imply that all of our

current scientific beliefs will one day be swept

away in a new revolution.

• It is difficult to imagine future scientists rejecting

our belief that the earth goes round the sun.

• They may, however, discover that such beliefs

are approximations to richer and more inclusive

theories the details of which we cannot at

present imagine.

“A new scientific truth does

not win by convincing its

opponents and making

them see the light, but

rather because its

opponents eventually die

and a new generation

grows up that is familiar

with it.” Max Planck

“In questions of science

the authority of a

thousand is not worth

the humble reasoning

of a single individual”

Galileo Galilei.

Methodological

anarchism

Everything

goes

“the worst enemy of

science”

Paul Karl Feyerabend

(1924 –1994)• Austrian-born philosopher of science.

• Major works:– Against Method (1975)

– Science in a Free Society (1978)

– Farewell to Reason (1987).

• Famous for his anarchistic view of science and his rejection of the existence of universal methodological rules.

• He is an influential figure in the philosophy of science, and also in the sociology of scientific knowledge.

Epistemological anarchism- There are no useful and exception-free

methodological rules governing the progress of

science or the growth of knowledge

• the idea that science can or should operate according to universal and fixed rules is unrealistic, pernicious and detrimental to science itself.

• anarchism reflects methodological pluralism

• scientific method does not have a monopoly on truth or useful results

• dadaistic "anything goes“ attitude

Science is an ideology

• Feyerabend holds that science is an

ideology alongside others such as religion,

magic and mythology.

• The dominance of science in society

authoritarian and unjustified.