Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Lecture 2
Is science rational and progressive?
Realism and instrumentalism
Inference to the best explanation
Criteria for theory choice
Logical positivists
Thomas Kuhn and
revolutions in science
Constructivism
Examples: plate tectonics and geomorphology
A scientific realist says...
A 1950s education in Freud, Marx, and
modernism is not a sufficient qualification
for a thinking person. Indeed, the traditional intellectuals
are, in a sense, increasingly reactionary, and quite often
proudly (and perversely) ignorant of many of the truly
significant intellectual accomplishments of our time.
Their culture, which dismisses science, is often non-
empirical. It uses its own jargon and washes its own
laundry. It is chiefly characterized by comment on
comments, the swelling spiral of commentary eventually
reaching the point where the real world gets lost.
John Brockman (science publisher www.edge.org)
Scientific Realism
versus
Instrumentalism
Scientific realism the aim of science is to provide
true theories of the world
All theories are attempted descriptions of reality
are ignored
Revolutionary Science
a) Process science
b) Historical science
catastrophism uniformitarianism
Shift
Is science progressive?
Facts about the world are paradigm-relative
Scientific knowledge is not necessarily cumulative
Does the concept of objective truth even make sense?
Is scientific knowledge socially
constructed?
Some of Kuhns readers interpreted his work to say
science is entirely non-rational and socially constructed
Two cultures?
1. The humanistic viewpoint in which the scientific method is seen
as embedded within language and culture
2. The scientific viewpoint in which it is believed that the observer
can objectively make non-culturally embedded observations
Discussions on the merits of constructivist and
positivist perspectives are ongoing (hopefully within a
constructive and positive dialogue)
Kuhns clarifications
Science may be viewed as rational
Incommensurabilty between paradigms is partial
Paradigm choice is made by reasonable shared criteria:
accuracy, scope, consistency, simplicity, fruitfulness etc.
Paradigm choice based on reasonable shared criteria is
rational
Science may be viewed as progressive
Conceived as a set of instruments for solving technical
puzzles in selected areas, science clearly gains in
precision and scope with the passage of time. As an
instrument, science undoubtedly progresses
So...can the scientific method be
rigorously defined?
Many have attempted to define the criteria for a good
theory, such as simplicity, breadth, goodness of fit etc.
No-one has produced a rigorous algorithm (sequence
of instructions) for the selection of scientific theories
Kuhn claimed there is no algorithm for theory choice
Science appears to conform to a looser definition and
more relaxed concept of rationality than often
assumed
Summary
Realism and instrumentalism
Inference to the best explanation
Logical positivists emphasis on theory
Thomas Kuhns emphasis on history
Paradigms, normal and revolutionary science
Science is more loosely defined than often assumed
Science is rational when viewed against shared criteria
As an instrument, it progressively solves empirical
questions
Final thought: What are appropriate and
inappropriate applications of science in geography?